David Pakman (3:52)

Right.

Senator Mark Warner (3:52)

Seem to be on a path toward deploying American troops on the ground in Iran to accomplish any of the potential objectives here. And there is also, as disturbingly as anything else, the specter of active Russian aid to Iran putting in danger American lives, literally. Russia seems to be aiding our enemy actively and intensively with intelligence and perhaps with other means. And China also may be assisting Iran.

David Pakman (4:37)

I got to tell you, Blumenthal looks pretty good for 80 years old. But that's not really the point of this discussion. When senators go in for a briefing about what is happening and what is going to happen in Iran, an optional war which was started without any congressional approval, and they sound this worried that we are going towards boots on the ground, everybody should pay attention. And no matter who you voted for, maybe you voted for Trump, maybe you voted for Kamala Harris, maybe you didn't vote at all. No matter what your voting history is, you should be asking yourself, is this a battle worth sacrificing American lives for? Knowingly, even just with the air war and what's been taking place so far, we have lost American service members. And Trump as well as Pete Hegseth and others have said we are going to lose more Americans. It's just a reality. Is this a worthwhile sacrifice? And for what? As we see gas prices now up 32% over the last few months, I'll get back to that in more detail. And we question what even are the goals because all of the ones that have been mentioned we are not achieving so far. Even though Donald Trump says that it is basically complete as far as achieving our goals is concerned, we also need to consider, or maybe I'll say it a different way, the key point is not that anything was announced about sending troops to fight a ground war in Iran. That lawmakers came out sounding as though that's where they expect the administration to go. While Donald Trump has said the primary objectives are complete should terrify everybody because it means Trump is either clueless or lying about the war. Either one is a problem and every indication is that this administration is not presenting the truth of what's going on or they simply don't understand what it is that's going on. Now at the same time that this briefing was going on. This is so it's wild. The briefing is going on and senators are coming out going, damn it looks like the administration wants to fight a ground war. Meanwhile, Caroline Levitt is saying the president is not ruling that out. So so far, everything is building up. A picture of this is going to be far more than just some airstrikes.

Caroline Levitt (7:09)

As for boots on the ground, the president has talked about this repeatedly, wisely. He does not rule options out as commander in chief. So again, I would hesitate to confirm anything that a Democrat on Capitol Hill says right now about the president's thinking.

David Pakman (7:23)

Expect sudden diagnoses of bone spurs to go through the roof if indeed it looks like we are getting closer and closer to that sort of ground deployment. So what's going on here is that the White House is kind of laying the groundwork for a bigger war with Iran without formally admitting it. In behind closed doors briefings with senators, they are painting a picture that certainly suggests a willingness and maybe even an interest in a ground war. Publicly, the White House press secretary continues to insist, we would never take that off the table. Trump is not going to take that off the table. We didn't hear no boots on the ground. We didn't hear any of that other than we don't rule options out. Donald Trump is keeping all options on the table. And I think that that's maybe the most important part of the clip, if you understand how slow escalation works. The message goes from no one's talking about boots on the ground to that's not an option we would take off the table to. And this is now forward looking. We're not at the point where we're ready to commit ground troops yet to it's looking like we may need to. And it slowly builds over time. And once a White House starts keeping this on the table for a while, the longer this goes and the longer boots on the ground stays on the table, the more we are getting closer and closer to some kind of full scale military operation and ground war. And so I'm not here to tell you, hey, ground war confirmed. That's not where we are. The headline is massive warning signs piling up and it is impossible to ignore. Does Donald Trump care about the human cost? I don't think so. Does Donald Trump primarily concerned with himself, with legacy and how he is perceived and liked or disliked yes. And on a political level, this is substantively dangerous, even before any kind of formal troop announcement. So if you've got sons and daughters that could be deployed and you voted Trump, I want to hear from you. Does this all sound worth it to you? We have just learned of a critical mistake that the Trump White House made. It relates to Iran, but it is also about Ukraine and Russia and it relates to drones. Let me explain what's going on. We recently learned that a few months ago, Ukraine came to the White House and they said, listen, we have a battlefield tested answer to the drone problem that now the United States is struggling with in Iran. And apparently Donald Trump's team did nothing about it. It's sort of like, hey, warning about pandemics, maybe we'll disband the pandemic response team rather than listen to them. So let me explain this. There's a reason that Ukraine may be saying, what's the connection between Iranian drone warfare and Ukraine? Ukraine has spent years fighting against Iranian designed drones because Russia started using the same basic systems against them. Putin invaded Ukraine years ago. They've been using the same technology that we are now fighting against in Iran. So Ukraine came to Trump with firsthand knowledge. This wasn't theory. This wasn't hypothetical. This was they've been fighting it for years. And according to the reporting, Zelensky's team showed up and they brought a presentation to the White House months ago and said, hey, we are aware and have low cost interceptor drone technology. We have air defense ideas, we have sensor systems that we have tested successfully. Trump was reportedly interested enough to say to his team, work on it. And no follow through ever happened. And so now we have a situation where, as we've been talking about, Iran has the lower cost capability of continuing this war with the drones. The United States military is struggling with the asymmetry of how to fight these relatively inexpensive drones with our very expensive equipment, and we have no idea what to do. But Ukraine came to the White House and said, hey, we do have an idea what to do. And we now are hearing from US Officials willing to speak off the record, including to Axios, that this was a tactical mistake before the Iran war. It would have been a brilliant thing to understand these systems and know how to fight against them. Now, again, I want to just interject here. This has nothing to do with whether we should have gone into Iran. This has nothing to do with whether Trump had congressional authorization to do this. He didn't. This has nothing to do with whether the goal of regime change is Even plausible, given that the regime has already appointed the son of the ayatollah to be the new supreme leader. I'm just saying, just merely on a strategy, if you were going to do this. The exact drone technology that Ukraine warned us about and said we can help you with has become a problem today for the United States. They fly low, they move slowly, they're hard to detect.

Caroline Levitt (12:54)

They.

David Pakman (12:54)

And we're using expensive interceptors against these cheap targets. And so we had an opportunity. And if you're saying, well, David, why do I care about this? Well, you care about it because it is your tax money that now is being wasted at a faster clip than it otherwise would have been if we had listened to what the Ukrainians had to tell us. It is Americans who now are at risk of being killed if this escalates as a result in part of our inability to deal with these cheap Ukraine, not Ukrainian, Iranian drones. And so this starts as kind of a military mistake, but then part of it is ego, part of it is politics, part of it is about competence or lack thereof. And Trump world has mostly treated Ukraine as an irritating thing, rather than listening to people who actually know what's going on and could have provided important information. And we know Trump is irritated with Zelensky. He finds the entire thing irritating. Now, the bigger humiliation is the irony, which is that Ukraine, which Trump and parts of his movement often dismiss, they go, oh, these Ukrainians are so annoying and they should just settle and give Putin some land and whatever. It seems as though the Ukrainians better understood the threat threat from the Iranian drone program than Trump himself did, who seems regularly surprised by what's going on. So, clean takeaway here. Critical error by Trump in the White House. They let ideology and attitude override basic military common sense. The Ukrainians knew how to deal with the drones. They offered to give the information to the United States. Trump said, do it, and then nobody did. Another complete and total humiliation. I want to let you know of something I'm giving away yesterday. My book, the Echo Machine, by the way, a New York Times bestseller. Just, just as an FYI, my book the Echo Machine was released in paperback yesterday. I have 100 signed book plates that I have signed and delivered to my publisher. If you buy any version of the book, dated the purchase dated yesterday or later. Okay, March 10th or later. You can get a free book plate. Simply submit your purchase info at David pakman.com/paperback. So, again, we're celebrating the release of the paperback, but you can buy any version of the book. It could be the audiobook. It could be the hardcover or of course the new paperback. Submit your proof of purchase@david pakman.com paper paperback and you can get a free signed bookplate from my publisher. There's a hundred of these available. Check it out. Some people are impossible to find. A gift for their birthday comes around, you have no idea what to get. I have the perfect solution. Our sponsor Book By Anyone Book by Anyone lets you create a fully personalized custom generated book where someone you know becomes the main character in their own story. I tried it. I uploaded a picture of myself, answered a few questions, ended up with a hilarious book about myself called the Froth Files where I as the main character uncover a massive political conspiracy hidden in the latte art of my morning cappuccino. If you're watching on YouTube we're showing the book right now. You can see how great it looks. Whole thing took under a couple of minutes. Answer a few prompts, pick a theme, pick cover art and they generate and print a full length book centered on the person you uploaded a photo of. It is a funny, unexpected gift that people enjoy receiving. For an unforgettable gift, go to book by anyone.com order your book today with free shipping. The link is in the description and AI tools are everywhere now, but most people aren't even aware how much AI can help their business and their daily workflow. Our sponsor Outskill is hosting a free two day AI mastermind training this Saturday and Sunday from 10am to 7pm Eastern. You don't need any coding or technical background and over those two days you're going to learn practical skills, how to use AI to automate repetitive tasks or building agents that can handle multi step work, connecting it to sheets or notion or CRMs so the information moves on its own. They are going to give you ready made systems that you can put to use right away. Outskill is rated 4.9 out of 5 on Trustpilot. More than 10 million professionals have taken their programs, learning directly from the experts with experience at Microsoft and Nvidia. The training is normally almost $400. They're offering it free right now to my audience. If you attend both days, you'll also get bonuses worth $1500 including an AI prompt Bible, a monetization roadmap and a personalized toolkit. Availability is limited. Grab your free seat using the link in the description. Lest anyone forget, this is an independent program. It's supported directly by our audience. If you like the work we do, if you think it's valuable, if you think, especially as we head into this next election cycle and the one after that, that having strong, robust, independent, progressive media is important. Then I invite you to get a membership at join pacman.com or get a premium substack subscription at substack.david pakman.com or do both. Both is great. I want to say thanks to Amanda Jenkins and Joseph Perot, who just signed up at Join Pacman Dotcom and are our newest two members. Membership comes with great perks and great strength, including the daily bonus show, an extra show which Alex Jones despises.

Senator Mark Warner (18:55)

Oh, the bonus show where you want to make money. Everybody else that makes money to fund themselves is bad.

David Pakman (19:00)

Exactly. I couldn't have said it better myself. Every time someone signs up on my website, Alex Jones sheds one more tear. And that is, I mean, listen, I can't say I hate it, that's for sure. Gas prices have exploded 32% over the last few months. I want to remind you, Donald Trump campaigned on lower prices, lower costs, instant relief for working people, on energy, on groceries, on tchotchkes, knickknacks and souvenirs. Everything was going to be cheaper. And instead we now are seeing gas prices jump at a speed that we have not seen for a really, really long time. Gas prices are now up. Look at this, 32% from their low just a few months ago. They bottomed out mid January at $2 and 73 cents a gallon. We are now at 360 per gallon. That is a 32% increase. And gas prices are up 70 cents per gallon in a few days. Days. The fertilization president has not really turned out to be that. And the affordability president has certainly not turned out to be that. Now, I don't know if you would call this ironic or whether you would call it just desserts, but some of the biggest gas price increases are happening in Trump supporting states. Georgia is seeing a massive explosion there. Indiana has seen gas prices skyrocket. West Virginia, the Trump loving state of West Virginia. And Trump's core promise, which is I will make life cheaper for you. We will make America affordable again. Exactly. We will make America safe again. Exactly. None of it is really. Well, actually, America is getting safer, but it has nothing to do with Trump. Crime rates have just been declining for 30 years. But that's a different story. If Trump hadn't made these promises about affordability, the gas price spike would be less of a political liability. I've explained to you before that even moderate gas price changes don't change that much for most people. In the immediate, as far as the cost of gas is concerned, if you drive, I think the average that Americans drive is like 800 miles a month or something like that. If you average in people who drive very, very little and people who drive a lot, I think it's something like 800 miles a month. But I may be misremembering. If gas prices go up 50 cents a gallon for the average vehicle and the average 800 miles a month, miles per month of driving, it's not that big of a change. But there's two problems. One, over time, if you have sustained higher gas prices, everything gets more expensive because most of our stuff is shipped via means that use oil based, petroleum based fuels for transportation. That's number one. And number two is that Trump promised. But you promised, he promised that everything, including gas prices would get cheaper. Now, the first reaction from the White House was to say this is going to be a small and temporary increase in gas prices. And later it'll be cheaper, Electricity will be cheaper, oil will be cheaper, gas will be cheaper. But as they've continued to say that, the prices just go up and up and up. And so that's a pretty bad message when voters are going to the gas pumps and paying more every single day that they fill up for the last two weeks. Reuters is also reporting that rising gasoline prices are going to push February inflation numbers up. So when you look at the broader inflation numbers, you also have to consider Trump is raising the overall inflation rate. And what most analysts are predicting is that gas prices will settle around 370 a gallon. That means we've got 10 more cents to go. Again, we're at 360 a gallon right now. This is not for premium. I was just looking at the other day at the gas station where I was getting, getting my car inspected. I have an ev, so I don't go around filling my gas pump. But still I look at the prices. We had premium in the five dollar range, but this is, this is regular gas at 360 right now. Analysts are saying expect it to go to 370. And then even if Trump backs off of this entire Iran war, gas prices are going to stay elevated for a period of time. So the point is, Trump sold voters, I'm going to bring you lower costs. And he's not doing it. Now, a couple of things Trump could do, he's already tried the first one, say it's temporary, prices are going to come down quickly. Analysts say that's not going to happen. Second, deescalate the conflict. Actually do Something geopolitically that will bring oil prices down and eventually bring gas prices down. Well, it seems like he's leaning on that. Trump could release reserves from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. This is believed to provide about 15 cents a gallon of relief temporarily. Trump could blame Biden or Iran or Obama, which I don't know that people will buy at this point in time. Or Trump could try to get prices to decline elsewhere to bring down the overall price level, but that seems very difficult right now. The real problem is that Trump made promises he couldn't keep. He wrote checks that couldn't be cashed, and now all of the options, quite frankly, make him look either weak or wrong or desperate or of. Or all three. All three things that Donald Trump really doesn't want to get tagged with. Caroline Levitt had a tough day yesterday. It was a really tough one for Caroline Levitt. She was going to have to tell extra lies, so she wore an extra big cross necklace. The bigger the necklace, the more lies I expect Caroline to tell, and very often it comes true. Caroline was asked, why did Trump claim that Iran bombed their own school with a Tomahawk missile? We don't even believe they have when no one else believes that to be the case. Listen to Caroline's answer. This is a classic school.

Senator Mark Warner (25:40)

Why did President Trump say yesterday that Iran may have Tomahawk missiles when there

David Pakman (25:45)

are only three other US Allies, plus the US that have those missiles, and

Caroline Levitt (25:49)

therefore could look again? President said yesterday he will accept the conclusion of this investigation by the Department of War. I know there's been a lot of speculation in the media about who may be responsible for this. We're not going to get ahead of the Department of War in the conclusion of that investigation. The president has a right to share his opinion, opinions with the American public. But he has said he'll.

David Pakman (26:10)

That's the trick right there. That is. They love doing this. They go, trump has every right to speak. Caroline, nobody was asking about rights. There was an example of this with Trump. When Trump has been asked previously, hey, are you. Are you considering pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell? And Trump goes, I have every right to do it. And of course, our reaction is, nobody's questioning that. We're asking you whether you're going to do it, because having the right to do it doesn't really mean anything, but doing it would raise a major red flag. And it's the same. These people are like clockwork. Why did Trump make something up? Absent any evidence, Trump has every right to give his opinion. Yeah, no, we're not questioning his right to do it, we're questioning the prudence of doing it. Oh, but he has the right to do it. Not about rights, Caroline. It's simply not about rights. Next reporter. Again, this was a really rough one for Caroline Levitt. Caroline Levitt was asked why did Trump do this based on his feeling of what was going to happen. And Caroline Levitt goes, well, his feelings were based on facts.

Caroline Levitt (27:21)

When I get back to the Oval Office after this. Sure.

David Pakman (27:25)

Thanks, Caroline.

Caroline Levitt (27:26)

The President said yesterday for the first

David Pakman (27:28)

time that he had to strike Iran because he believes that Iran was going

Caroline Levitt (27:32)

to strike U.S. targets within seven days. And then he then bumped that down

David Pakman (27:36)

later to three days.

Caroline Levitt (27:37)

Where is he getting that? Well, that's not the first time the President has said that he chose to launch Operation Epic Fury because he felt as though Iran was going to strike the United States and our assets in the region first. Again, I addressed this in the last briefing. This was a feeling the President had based on facts, facts provided to him by his top negotiators who had been engaged with the Iranian regime in a good faith effort. The Iranian regime was lying, deceiving the United States of America, clearly trying to continue their nuclear program to create a bomb that would of course threaten the United States of America. Again, their ballistic missile arsenal. They were rapidly and aggressively increasing that by the month to a place where they would essentially build immunity for themselves, where a future president or President Trump would not be able to launch this incredibly successful operation. And so the president, again, as I have reiterated and he has said, was not going to sit back and allow the Iranian regime to threaten or to attack the United States of America any longer. But there are no US Leaders or Israeli leaders who are making those same claims. So is he making this up to just his decision to go to war now?

David Pakman (28:46)

Ms.

Caroline Levitt (28:47)

The President is not making anything up, Nancy. He is looking at this every single day based on intelligence, based on facts, and based on intelligence that he himself and his negotiators have consumed based on their again, negotiations with the rogue Iranian regime over the past year. And the President and his team tried in a good faith way to reach a diplomatic deal through peaceful means with the Iranian regime and Iran chose this path to death.

David Pakman (29:14)

I think you get the point. The funny part is none of these supposed facts about the imminence of attacks or the rebuilding of nuclear none of those facts are actually supported as facts by experts who increasingly are saying none of the justifications make sense. Number one. And Caroline's claim that all of the goals have been substantially achieved is also untrue. If the goal was to destroy the supposedly rebuilt nuclear capabilities, we have no reason to believe that that has taken place. If the goal was to achieve regime change and get away from the ayatollah family from being in control, well, that didn't happen because they have appointed the son of the Ayatollah. The Ayatollah who was killed, the ayatollah son has been appointed the new supreme leader. So that didn't happen to destroy their missile capability. That reportedly hasn't happened. What is she talking about when she says that the objectives have been substantially achieved? That doesn't make any sense. Now, on a different topic, Caroline Levitt was asked about the SAVE Act. The SAVE act would be extraordinarily oppressive when it comes to voting rights. And one of the things that seems to be acknowledged by Caroline Levitt here is that while she denies that the SAVE act would make voting more difficult for married women, she actually acknowledges it. Listen carefully to what she says and see if you can pick it up.

Caroline Levitt (30:33)

And as far as married women who have changed their name, if they're already registered to vote, they're entirely unaffected by the SAVE Act. And for the small fraction of individuals who have changed their name or their address, they can still register to vote. Of course, they just have to go through their state processes to update that documentation. And this is something that the American people, married women and minorities and people all across this country who Democrats are insultingly saying cannot do this. They're already doing it every day, going to the Social Security office, going to the dmv. And I think it's frankly insulting that the Democrats are saying that there are certain groups of people in this country who aren't smart enough to update their documentation to allow them to vote.

David Pakman (31:13)

No one is arguing that people, Democrats, women, minorities, aren't smart enough to update documents in order to be able to vote. What we are saying is that, number one, many of the underlying documents you need under some of these voter ID schemes are not free documents. Sure, the voter ID may be free, but the documents you need in order to register are often not free documents, depending on the state you're in. Number two, you have to go and update your registration. A lot of people can't take 2, 3, 4, 5 hours, depending on where you live, during normal work hours, to go to the dmv, for example, even if it's free, you're losing wages when you do it. Not everybody has transportation. The point here is I don't know any people on the left in my space, right? I sometimes people will email, they go, look, look at this person, this content creator you never heard of, who believes this thing. The mainstream view in the part of the left that I occupy is not that the problem is inherent to so called voter IDs or registration or these schemes. It's that there are a lot of other ways in which they will disenfranchise people, even by forcing people to lose wages or pay for documents they need in order to justify the idea, etc. The idea itself is not really the problem. The implementation and the whole point of it is. And of course if Republicans didn't believe that this stuff would help them win, they wouldn't be doing it. They wouldn't waste their time on something they believe would be bad or even neutral for them. They know it will be good for them. Finally, Caroline Levitt asked, we are getting a report that 150 U.S. service members have been injured so far in Iran. Is that true? And Caroline Levitt goes and sort of

Caroline Levitt (33:03)

in the ballpark for you today. Alex, thank you.

David Pakman (33:06)

Reuters has reported that about 100, 150

Senator Mark Warner (33:09)

US service members have been injured so far.

David Pakman (33:12)

Can you confirm that number and elaborate on that?

Caroline Levitt (33:15)

I can't confirm this the exact number. I know it's within that ballpark, but I would defer you to the Pentagon for a specific number of wounded or injured thus far.

David Pakman (33:25)

The White House that is providing daily updates about Trump's successes in Iran simply isn't sure about the exact number of troops who have been injured. Interesting. What on earth is going on here? Democrats have flipped their 10th consecutive special election. MAGA just lost another one. This is very good news about what we may be approaching in November. Democrats have flipped another Republican seat. This one's in New Hampshire, a special election. Bobby Boodman defeated Republican Dale Fincher 52 to 48. Now, interestingly, this was a district that Trump won by nine. This is politically ugly for Republicans. Trump was plus nine, the Republican is minus four. That is a 13 point swing since November of 2024. Now also interestingly, Boodman had lost his seat twice before to the Republican incumbent. So this was not like an obvious Democratic pickup. On paper, this was a competitive race and especially with Trump having won this district by 9 and Boodman having taken some losses in the past, this was a completely plausible race for the Republican to win and the Democrat to lose. But Republicans realized this isn't looking so good. They started massive dumps of money into the race and they saw a whole bunch of money Raised by the Republican Dale Fincher from outside groups. Outside groups spent extra money on their own. Republicans tried to get help from major players. They sucked in the Republican State Leadership Committee, Americans for Prosperity, the Koch Network group. And the winner, Boodman ultimately raised only about $12,000, had no outside support and still won. And so on a sort of individual level, this is pretty embarrassing for Republicans, but the bigger picture level is what this means for November as Democrats are just continuing to flip these special elections. Now, one of the main sort of issues in this race was school vouchers. Boodman opposed school vouchers and the Republican Fincher wanted something called the Education Freedom accounts of New Hampshire, which are essentially vouchers. And that seemed to be a relevant issue. The Republican only recently moved into the district had to run as a write in candidate. So there are definitely some things here that would make us say, well, I don't know that the full 13 point swing represents the true change in the will of the voters, but you can't deny the numbers. 10th straight special election flip for Democrats Since Trump's second term began, Republicans have flipped zero Democratic seats during that same period of time. So if you just look at that, it is a disaster for the Republican Party. And the real story as I look at this is that Democrats are overperforming in actual elections and Republicans are getting rejected by real voters time and time and time again. So can we extrapolate vote by vote, point by point to what's going to happen in November? Of course we can. Is it possible that Democrats take the House but by the slimmest of slim margins? Completely possible. That's absolutely a possible outcome. Is it also possible that this is a building blue wave if we get out there and make it happen and Republicans could lose 4,050 or even 60 seats in the House of Representatives 100%. And so if I were MAGA, not that I'm giving them advice, but it's just sort of like reacting to what we're seeing in the real world. If I were maga, I would be very skeptical of this message of total dominance that is being sold to them by people like Donald Trump and Stephen Miller and others, because you have what they are saying and what they've been saying now for, what is it, 17 months or something like that since Trump won five. And yeah, 17 months. For the last 17 months they've been saying we're dominating, we're crushing. I have 94% approval rating from Republicans, says Trump. And then you look at the election result and you go Democrats are winning everything. Democrats are taking every special election. Democrats are flipping red seats in red states. And just wait until I tell you, probably tomorrow about what is going on with Marjorie Taylor Greene's old seat in Georgia. Senator Mark Warner will join me next Scams and identity theft rarely start with a hacked password. They usually start when your personal information is easy to find online. Your address, phone number, relatives, employment history. That information lives on countless data broker sites on the Internet, accessible to almost anyone unless you actively remove it. Our sponsor, Incogni, is a service that handles that for you. Incogni doesn't just focus on one category of sites. It works to take down your personal data wherever it appears online, reducing the raw material scammers used to impersonate you or target your family. Incogni will automatically handle removals across hundreds of known sites. But the most powerful feature is custom removals, which is included with the unlimited plan. If you find your info anywhere, even an obscure directory, a business database, something new, you paste the link into Incogni. Their team will work to get it removed. That level of coverage really matters. Even a single exposed profile can lead to fraud, harassment, identity theft. Incogni's removal process is independently verified by Deloitte and you can get 60% off when you go to incogni.com/pacman and use the code Pacman. There's something special about having real quality bread at home. Fresh from the oven. It elevates any meal and our sponsor Wild Grain makes it easy. Wild Grain is a baked from frozen subscription box for sourdough breads, artisanal pastries and fresh pasta. Everything arrives frozen, goes in the oven, no thawing. Ready in 25 minutes or less. Wild Grain uses simple ingredients and slow fermentation to give their bread real depth of flavor. What I like most is the flexibility. I can keep sourdough loaves and croissants stocked in my freezer. Bake what I need. No prep, no cleanup. Tastes like something you'd get at a small specialty bakery. But you don't have to spend an hour driving to the bakery and back or making them from scratch. Wild Grain boxes are fully customizable. Along with the new variety box, there's the gluten free vegan and protein boxes. Wild grain is offering $30 off your first box plus free croissants for life. When you go to wildgrain.com/pacman or use promo code Pacman at checkout, the link is in the description Is Donald Trump running an illegal war in Iran? What is the actual Law. Did Israel bait, goad, or trick Trump into going to war with Iran? What is happening behind the scenes in the sense of are there any things that Democratic senators can do to try to restrain Trump's power here? And how high are gas prices going to go? I spoke to Democratic Senator Mark Warner about all of that and much more. Now we will be speaking with Senator Mark Warner representing the state of Virginia. Senator, really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. We're in the middle of a number of calamities, one being what appears to be Schrodinger's War. It is, and it is not a war. It is over, but it is also just ramping up depending on whether you listen to the president or to the Secretary of defense. Can you tell me just a little bit about what you and your colleagues kind of believe deep down about how long this is all going to last?

Senator Mark Warner (41:25)

Well, David, first of all, thank you for having me on. I appreciate what you do to help get the word out. Let's start with the fact that, you know, this is a war of choice. I'm the ranking member on the Intelligence Committee. I'm a member of the Gang of Eight. If there was any imminent threat to America from Iran, I would know it. There was not. And there was not even an imminent threat to Israel over the longer term, the rise of Iranian ballistic missiles. But this was didn't have to happen at this moment in time, particularly when there was still some option around diplomacy. That would be the first part. So the President, because the Israelis are going to move, decided to go ahead and attack first with the Israelis. And what's been remarkable is that he can't seem to get a story straight on what the goals of this war is. I know at first they tried to deny it was a war. He uses the term war all the time himself. But it was originally going to be regime change.

David Pakman (42:31)

Right?

Senator Mark Warner (42:32)

Well, that's obviously not going to happen since the Iranians have picked a new supreme leader who is more conservative than the former supreme leader and the new guy who was the son of the supreme leader. The Americans have killed his father, his wife and his child. So not a lot of opportunity there then. The goal was to try to get rid of the Iranian nuclear capabilities, which the president claimed had been obliterated last June. There was talk and acknowledgement if they were really going to go after the enriched uranium, it would take troops on the ground. That seems to be kind of not on the table right now. So the ability to really destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities is not going to happen. And then on the ballistic missiles, there have been some of those taken out, but they still have. I can't get into the numbers or details, but they still have a lot of capability there. And then they added a fourth criteria recently about getting rid of the Iranian navy. And while many of the major naval ships that Iran had had been sank, they've still got lots of these small boats that could really wreak havoc in the Straits of Hormuz, where all of the. The oil goes through. So on all four of those goals, I don't think we're anywhere close to achieving the President's objectives. So we don't know how long this is gonna last. I will point out that on Monday afternoon. Cause I think the President got spooked with the markets going down. It looked to me like he was almost manipulating the markets by going out and saying, hey, we're almost done here. Markets recovered. And then once the markets recovered, he said, you know, he kind of went back to, no, we've still got more to go. And even today, they are saying, you know, Hegseth has said this is going to be the most mighty attack day yet of the conflict. And I would just point out as well, you know, Iran still has some cards to play. You know, they've really not called on their proxies, the Houthis, to attack yet. They've not called on the Shia militia groups in Iraq to attack. So we are in a. I don't award with, at this point, no dependable end, unless the president gets so spooked by the gas prices that he just declares, you know, unconditional victory. And if that were the case, I almost feel like Iran might come out stronger than it went into this conflict.

David Pakman (45:00)

Well, that's a very interesting point, because I do think there are now reports that people around Donald Trump are saying, you've got to figure out an off ramp here. There was a report that Friday Susie Wiles was literally running around the White House screaming about gas prices, and they're trying to figure out what to do. It wouldn't surprise me that Trump gets so spooked that he does declare unconditional victory. I just don't know, as you're pointing out, that this is necessarily Trump's escalation to end at this point, because there is talk of Iran being able to tolerate, you know, Iran is a poorer and less resourced country than the United States, but they have a sizable military, and they have the ability, if they so choose to tolerate a war of attrition, to continue making Life very difficult for the United States. There's talk of sleeper cells, which Donald Trump was asked about recently, and he said, we're looking into that, which to me suggests he doesn't really know anything about it, but it is an area of concern. I don't know that it's even Trump's place now to decide when this is really over. Because the Iranians also have a say in that.

Senator Mark Warner (45:58)

Absolutely. And you know, again, this is where the lack of pre planning has been astonishing to me, since this was a war of choice and we knew when the Israelis were going, so we were going. Why we didn't do a better job of getting our personnel out of the region, not only at diplomatic and intel agencies, but just the American tourists who were transiting through the region. We're behind most of the European countries and getting our nationals out, that's gotten a little bit better. But, boy, people were. I got an awful lot of calls from pretty scared Virginians for a number of days about how do we get out of this war zone. Obviously, we didn't pre wire this with most of our European allies. And then when they started asking questions the president has struck out about against the UK for example, because the UK Was actually trying to follow their own laws that they couldn't participate until there was some strike against them. They have participated now since there was a strike against Cyprus. There seems to be a lack of understanding amongst those allies, the Gulf allies. I think it depends upon the country. But many of them are in a vulnerable position right now. And you did raise the issue of whether we call sleeper cells or cyber attacks. Orion's got a pretty capable cyber capability. And whether there are quote, unquote, sleeper cells, I don't want to get into. But you could see Iranian inspired individuals in America saying, all right, we're going to take action on our own. And unfortunately, this administration, particularly with Cash Patel and FBI, has degraded and gotten rid of so many of the senior people around counterterrorism, counter espionage. I don't think anybody who's an expert in this field would say on those fields that we are safer now than we were, say, a year ago.

David Pakman (48:00)

I'm generally pretty skeptical of claims that the Trump administration has done A to distract from B or B, to distract from C, partially because I just don't think that they're that capable and well coordinated with. But it is true that since the start of this Iran war, the number of Google searches related to the Epstein files have dropped dramatically. And so I'm not suggesting that this was a Proactive campaign. But it does seem to be the case that a lot of attention has kind of gone away from that topic. What's your sense of where that issue stands right now? We still haven't gotten the full unredacted files, etc.

Senator Mark Warner (48:39)

I still do not understand why. These files are still dribbling out. Why the FBI, I'm sorry, the Justice Department has not followed the law, other than the fact that our senior people at DOJ trying to slow this process down. I would say, though, that while there are a lot of legitimate questions still around the Epstein files, the idea of going to war and driving up gas prices, on average, 47 cents a gallon. So Americans are paying $125 million a day more out of their pockets to buy gasoline. That's a. That's a pretty wild, you know, wag the dog counter theory, because I'm not sure that puts Trump overall in a better position.

David Pakman (49:27)

No, no, I agree with you. What is your sense with regard to the oil and gas prices? You know, I often for. For over a decade, I've been telling my audience presidents have relatively little influence over gas prices. A lot of this has to do with global supply issues, black swan type events, etc. One of the things presidents can do is declare a gas tax holiday, which will temporarily make gas a little cheaper. They can dig into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, or the third one is they can get into a military conflict with a nation that is either a big oil producer or controls supply. What is your sense now of the trajectory of oil and gas, which is already affecting so many people, as you said, an extra 125 million a day total. Is that the, the factor that may get the White House to do a 180?

Senator Mark Warner (50:18)

I think is I think your comments are accurate about the President's team freaking out about gas prices. I think back to when we had high gas prices and President Biden was a little bit betwixt in between. This is where Americans see the most. And when you see such a dramatic increase in such a short period of time, I almost felt bad for Chris Wright, the Energy Secretary. I was on a Sunday show with him and he was trying to say, hey, no problem here, which couldn't pass the smell test. I'm worried on a couple of fronts. The only country that is directly benefiting from this war on oil so far is Putin and Russia. The administration has even given relief to allow more oil sales to India. This fills up Putin's coffers, while the Ukrainians were actually not getting a lot of reporting, but were taking out so many Russian troops that I'm not saying the balance had flipped, but the Ukrainians were more than holding their own. So giving a lot more money to Vladimir Putin isn't in America's interest. And I don't think even if there was a cessation of hostilities that you're going to see the gas prices go down anywhere back to where they were two weeks ago. And the idea that the president said, well, maybe this is a chance for Venezuelan oil to come up and that will be a new supply source, I mean, the Venezuelan oil infrastructure was so degraded that it'll take at least a couple of years. And even then, many of the oil companies are reluctant to go back into Venezuela. And there have been, I don't think we know enough to know with the president, some of the strikes on the Iranian oil facilities, how much of that supply could be cut back. And the just unease that is still going to remain after the conflict, particularly if Iran regime is still there, the unease that will be coming out of Saudi, be coming out of Bahrain, being coming out of the Emiratis, are they going to go back to full production? And even if the Straits Hormuz reopen, will they reopen at the same flow? And won't there have to be additional protections? And the idea that again, the president and others have said that you could escort ships through, I'm not a naval expert, but that's a pretty narrow strait. And if the Iranians still have at least all of these kind of small and mid sized speedboats that could at least harass those tankers again, that's not a good sign. So I think we're going to see even if the conflict, the fighting part comes to an end and Iran's still there, I don't think you see oil, you know, hate to say you, it's still going to be probably north of 80 bucks, north of 75 bucks a barrel and that'll be passed on to American consumers.

David Pakman (53:14)

When it comes to the question of Israel's role in this, you know, my perspective has been I'm a very big supporter of Israel existing and I am a very big critic of the Netanyahu administration. What do you make right now or what's your best assessment of the degree to which Netanyahu goaded, baited or forced use whichever word you believe is appropriate. Donald Trump into getting involved in this. And for context, we looked at Secretary Blinken's comments that there were attempts to pull President Obama into something similar, but he understood what the point was and resisted. There were attempts to pull President Biden into something similar. It seems, in a sense, Trump fell for it.

Senator Mark Warner (53:59)

I am also a very strong supporter of Israel, and I've been criticized by someone in the Democratic Party for being such strong supporter. I do feel the October 7th attack was awful. And I do think there is a rise of anti Semitism in America and around the world. But I also think when Americans are being put in harm's way, that we should not be in any way outsourcing our foreign policy decisions to any other government and any other ally anywhere in the world. And I worry that the current Israeli administration, along with some allies in Congress, just beat on him, beat on him, beat on him. And I fear that they may have made the argument, hey, Mr. President, look how easy it was in Venezuela. Look how easy it was with your strike against the Iranian nuclear facilities, which again, the president claimed that obliterated those facilities. Obviously, not that I can't say. But the idea that he could have been convinced this was going to be an easy in and out operation,

David Pakman (55:16)

you

Senator Mark Warner (55:16)

know, has a ring of truth to it.

David Pakman (55:17)

It seems the theme is, and I'll let you go after this, that Trump is very manipulatable by people who he sees as strong in the sense of, you know, think back to Putin in Helsinki, where Trump, Trump comes out and he says, forget about what our own intelligence agency said. Putin denied hacking very strongly, and I believe him. And then the Kim Jong Un summit, where Kim Jong Un makes the same promises that North Korean leaders have been making and not sticking to for decades. And Trump goes, look at these great promises he just gave me, and he believes it. It seems that that's the theme here.

Senator Mark Warner (55:53)

Yeah, and it's. He obviously is attracted to strong men. He thinks of himself as a strong man theory. You know, he seems to have a huge affection for authoritarian leaders. And it's not uncommon knowledge here in D.C. that the way to influence Donald Trump is be the last person to talk to him before he makes a decision or before he goes on tv.

David Pakman (56:16)

Yes.

Senator Mark Warner (56:17)

And whoever is the last person in his ear ends up those words coming out of his mouth. That's not the way that we ought to be running our country Or Suresh act should not be the way we should be running our foreign policy when we now are up to eight American service members who've been killed in this conflict. And even with the president and Hegsef's own predictions, unfortunately, the high probability of more to come.

David Pakman (56:41)

Senator Mark Warner, Democratic senator from Virginia. Thanks for your time. Today. I really appreciate it David.

Senator Mark Warner (56:46)

Thank you as well.

David Pakman (56:47)

Quick Interruption Here's a helpful tip. Thinking about updating your home. TikTok is full of simple DIY and decor ideas, Small changes, big results, all in quick easy videos. Download TikTok now. 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 daily commercial free show, and plenty of other great membership perks. Get the full experience by signing up@join pacman.com if you're wondering the mood at the White House, you need only look at Donald Trump's Truth Social page where he has been losing, losing his mind and suffering meltdown after meltdown after meltdown because so much is crumbling around him and much of it has to do with this failed incursion into Iran, a war of choice that Donald Trump started. Let's take a look at some of his posts from the last few hours. Donald Trump posting quote if Iran has put out any mines in the Hormuz Strait and we have no reports of them doing so, we want them removed immediately. If for any reason mines were placed and they are not removed forthwith, the military consequences to Iran will be at a level never seen before. If, on the other hand, they remove what may have been placed, it will be a giant step in the right direction. Additionally, we are using the same technology, Capital T technology, and Capital M missile capabilities deployed against drug traffickers to permanently eliminate any boat or shipped ship attempting to mine the Hormuz Strait. They will be dealt with quickly and violently. Beware. There's a lot of if Iran has done this, that or the other thing, and the growing takeaway is that Trump has no idea what's going on there. And quite frankly, I don't think Trump cares. Trump has run a lot of this war from Florida, from his various golf courses in Florida, to the extent that he's running anything at all. And you'll remember when the decision was made to start this war, it was J.D. vance in Washington, D.C. in the situation Room and Trump just playing, quite literally playing golf in Florida and then announcing a war and then playing golf in Florida and deejaying in the Mar? A Lago Ballroom or whatever, and a lot of ifs and ends, which suggests Trump doesn't really know what's going on. Another example, Trump posting quote if Iran does anything that stops the flow of oil within the Strait of Hormuz, they will be hit by the United States of America 20 times harder than they have been hit thus far. Additionally, we will take out easily destroyable targets that will make it virtually impossible for Iran to ever be built back as a nation again. Death, fire and fury will rain upon them, but I hope and pray that it does not happen. This is a gift from the United States of America to China and all of those nations that heavily use the Hormuz Strait. Hopefully it is a gesture that will be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Yeah, why hasn't China said thank you to President Trump? And again, we've spoken with Ruth Ben Ghiat about the obsession that authoritarians have with being thanked. Have I been appreciated enough today for everything I've done for people? Most important element to this, the number of ifs on these posts that suggest Trump doesn't really know what's going on. Completely off the charts now. Meanwhile, after saying we don't know whether Iran did or didn't put any minds or whatever, Trump posts the following quote, I am pleased to report that within the last few hours we have hit and completely destroyed 10 inactive mine laying boats and ships with more to follow. Inactive. So wait a second. First it's I don't think they've placed any mines, but if they did, there's going to be hell to pay. Then it's hey, you know what? I guess they did because we just destroyed some mine laying boats, but they were inactive. So were they laying mines or weren't they? What did you just destroy? Do you have any idea whatsoever? I don't think he does. And then shifting gears completely to energy, where I believe that this is the prototypical example of being penny wise and pound foolish. Trump saying, quote, America. That's my emphasis. America is returning to real energy dominance. Today I am proud to announce that America First Refining is opening the first new US oil refinery in 50 years in Brownsville, Texas. Trump calls it a massive win for American workers. He thanks partners and he says that this will fuel US Markets, strengthen our national security, boost American energy production, blah blah blah, we are dominant, etc. This is really an example of missing the forest for the trees. It's like a, you're in a sinking boat and you're trying to empty it out with a thimble. It's being penny wise and pound foolish. Trump's harebrained decision to go into Iran has now seen gas prices spike 32% from their lows just three months, two months ago. And then Trump's going, we're opening one refinery, open the refinery I think we should be moving away from fossil fuels regardless but open the refinery. But the idea that that's going to take away attention from or even counteract what you are doing to the gas and oil markets with the war is laughable. And then finally Trump asserting some insults. Quote I predict that Representative Thomas Massie will go down as the worst Republican congressman in the long and fabled history of the United States Congress. Even worse than crazy Liz Cheney crying Adam Kinzinger and Marjorie Trader Brown. Remember Greene turns to Brown under stress. They are all misfits and losers but Massie who is running against a great American patriot in the Kentucky primary will hopefully lose big. I love Kentucky President DJT loyalty as the only currency. The most important reminder about how Donald Trump operates and he knows a lot of this stuff is going south. On the bonus show today Talarico polling really well in Texas lawmakers trying to lower housing prices and much more. I'll see you then.