← The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
Pentagon moves carrier strike group toward Middle East amid Iran tension
01:33:43
Loading summary
Transcript144 lines
- [00:00]
Hugh Hewitt
Welcome to today's podcast sponsored by Hillsdale College, all things hillsdale@ hillsdale.edu. i encourage you to take advantage of the many free online courses there. And of course, a listen to the Hillsdale dialogues, all of them@q4hillsdale.com or just Google, Apple, itunes and Hillsdale. I'm Hugh Hewitt in the Relief Factor Studio West. Most of today's program and all of this monologue is going to be about President Donald Trump's national security strategy, which I believe is a realism based strategy. What is in America's best interest? What can he do to advance it? How does he advance it within the envelope of not creating excessive risk for the American military and the American people? He's got a great group of advisers. He obviously trusts his vice president. He obviously trusts Secretary of State Rubio. He obviously trusts Secretary of deforestation. I'm not used to saying it yet. Hegseth and the chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff Kaine. That's the core group. All right. That's the core group. And he's got a great UN Ambassador in Michael Waltz to project his policy pronouncements out to the world. What do I think is happening? Well, I think he's assessing how does he hurt the mullahs, how does he hurt the regime such that it collapses? And yesterday's big development is he kind of walked back his talk of the last week. Week ago he was on this program and said, if the Iranians kill their people, we're going to get involved. And he doubled down on that with Sean Hannity and he said on truth, social help is on the way and make Iran great again. And he talked about it with Tony Degopol. And then yesterday he said we've been told the killings are stopped and there won't be execution. So a lot of Trump critics want to accuse him of being feckless and erratic. I want to say, you know, wait a minute, what else happened yesterday? He turned the Lincoln strike group left. It is in the South China Sea. It's a lot of firepower. It's an aircraft carrier with the full wing. It's got a bunch of destroyers, it's got submarines, it's got all sorts of eyes in the sky sort of stuff as well. And it's going to take, I think, 10 days to get to the Middle East. Why does that matter? Because I fully expect if we hit Iran, they're going to unload on our airbase at Qatar and on our allies or wherever there are American air bases or American service people in Iraq and especially on our ally Israel. And if they do that, their ballistic missile arsenal is full. Their nuclear program has been obliterated by President Trump. And if they do that, we need more firepower in the Gulf. Now we sent a lot of the firepower that we had in the Gulf down to the Caribbean because we had to take out Maduro and did. That's a very good thing. I talked about the reality based foreign policy of Donald Trump on America's NEWSROOM this morning with Dana Perino. Here is that clip.
- [03:02]
Selena Zito
And joining us now is FOX News contributor and radio host Hugh Hewitt. I don't think that they really felt like they got what they were looking for from the Danish side. Listen to the Danish foreign minister on Special Report last night.
- [03:15]
Hugh Hewitt
We will now set up this high level working group to explore whether there is a way forward where we can accommodate, which I totally agree, you know.
- [03:24]
Christine Rosen
The President's concern and still respect, of.
- [03:28]
Hugh Hewitt
Course, the territorial integrity of the Kingdom.
- [03:31]
Alex Gray
Of Denmark and the Greenlandic people's right to self determination.
- [03:35]
Selena Zito
So in a way, we're just at the beginning of these conversations and President Trump came out hot. They came out hot. Do you think that there ultimately will be a deal?
- [03:46]
Hugh Hewitt
I do. David, good morning. The United States began talking about Greenland the first Trump term. And it's because it's an enormous island, right? Three times the size of Texas. It's got 27,000 miles of shoreline. And the key here is there is an exclusive economic zone around each of those 27,000 miles that extends out 230 miles. That means whoever has sovereignty over Greenland gets to control the 230 miles adjacent to it in the ocean. China is a problem on a number of fronts. They have hypersonic missile missiles and they have an enormous fishing fleet. And wherever their enormous fishing fleet go, they overfish, they break the rules, they destroy the environment. So excluding the Chinese fishing fleet is something Denmark cannot do. They only have 20 ships. They're a good ally. They sent 18,000 troops to Afghanistan during the long war. They're a good member of NATO, but they're not. There's 6 million people. They're not equipped to defend Greenland. There are only 60,000 people on Greenland. Only 7.5% of them are Danes. The rest are native Inuits. And the fact is we need it for space force because of hypersonic missiles. We need it for Golden Dome and we need it for the exclusive economic zone to keep the Chinese out. So the president's very serious. I know Denmark has got its back up a little bit because he's talked bluntly, but I'd rather have the blunt conversation about the realities of national security than not talk about it and pretend like Denmark is up to the challenge of excluding the Chinese fishing fleet or dealing with hypersonic missiles.
- [05:18]
Selena Zito
Hugh, I just want to show everybody I want to get to Venezuela, but can you pull up the map here? This is a map of the Arctic Circle and it shows military posts of China, Russia, the US and Europe. And to me, this helps visualize what the President is talking about.
- [05:36]
Hugh Hewitt
I agree, Dana, because the hypersonic missile threat, they'll come over the Pole and that means we need our forward defense built and deployed on Greenland and on every forward facing part of the Western Hemisphere if we're going to deter that kind of long range. We're not talking decades here. The Chinese think in terms of centuries, the Russians and generations. Americans used to think in terms of decades. I think President Trump is thinking in terms of centuries and he's thinking as a realist. And, and the Danes just have to figure it out. There's 6 million people, they're good friends. We love going to Copenhagen, we can be buddies. But the realities of the world are that China is a predatory power with a predatory fishing fleet and hypersonic missiles. That's the reality. And I praise Donald Trump for dealing with the reality. And I'm sorry that the Danes are upset, but the reality of the world is Greenland ought to be under American sovereignty.
- [06:28]
Selena Zito
In addition, the Danes and the rest of Europe are getting closer to China and on the tech side of things and then trying to tax our companies and regulate them out of existence. One last quick question for you. President Trump will host the Venezuelan opposition leader Machado today at the White House. He spoke to Delsey Rodriguez. The current leader of Venezuela is going to say Colombia. Venezuela. What are you looking for out of this meeting today?
- [06:53]
Hugh Hewitt
Regime evolution. We're not into regime change. It's not Iran where we want regime collapse. We want regime evolution so that the people who replaced Maduro, they're bad people too, but they're being nicer now. They're releasing political prisoners. We want to move towards bringing Machado back and allowing the people of Venezuela to have a free and fair and frequent elections. That's a good step forward for the President to be meeting with Ms. Machado.
- [07:16]
Selena Zito
The Nobel Prize laureate, Hugh Hewitt, always a pleasure.
- [07:19]
Hugh Hewitt
So we covered Greenland and we covered Venezuela and we didn't cover Iran because they had other people do Iran. But there's a coherent national security policy coming from the Oval Office for the first time since President Trump left the Biden years were incoherent. Secretary Biden, National Security Adviser SULLIVAN they were in a different world. And it was the world that was built by Barack Obama for eight years and John Kerry and Ben Rhodes. And it was silly. It was based on the fantasy that everybody is nice at heart and nobody wants to mow down civilians. Well, guess what? The mullahs mowed down thousands of people in the last week. I mean, they just opened fire on civilians marching in the street. If you can imagine any of our great marches in the past, Civil rights March of 1963 or the March for Our Lives by the students from Parkland afterwards, just imagine a regime setting up machine guns and mowing down those people. That's what they did over the last week. Not surprisingly. They're not in the streets last night, at least by anything we have seen. We don't have a lot of visibility. They're still off the Internet. But Secretary of the Treasury Scott Besant was on newsma last night and he said, we're watching them, the mullahs, the regime, the IRGC move all of their money out. They are taking their hard currency out. They're getting out of that because they're afraid their regime cannot stand up. Because the reality, even if the marches have stopped for a while, is Donald Trump put his credibility on the line. Doesn't mean he has to act today or this weekend or next week or even next month. I think the window's much larger than that. You got to get your ducks in order. He's got Chairman Kaine. If Chairman Kaine says to him, we can get Maduro and we're going to practice getting Maduro. And we set up Maduro's compound and we practice, practice, practice, and we have this weather window and the chairman says go. And the secretary of War says go. Then the president goes go and gives the order. So now he wants options about Iran. He wants them to be absolutely devastating options, but not long range. He wants to help dissolve the regime, but he's not about replacing the regime. He's about regime collapse and then see who comes out on top. He's not thrown in with the Crown Prince Pahlavi. He ishe told me that last week he didn't think it was appropriate for him to try and pick a winner. But if he can help collapse it, great. He's also a realist now and he note that Carrier Strike Group has within it a lot of capacity to intercept ballistic missiles and destroy them in the sky as they did in concert with the Israeli Defense Forces last June. So if we're getting ready to get into a hot war, even a short one with Iran, that sends a message, don't kill your civilians. You want more assets in place. That's the Lincoln carrier and the Lincoln strike group that goes along with the carrier. You want to give the Israelis enough time and you want to let our Arabella, everything else, smoke and mirrors. Don't tell me he's baited and switched and let down the Iranian people. We don't know that. We won't know that until we can look backwards from a period of time, certain couple of months down the road, minimum, to say whether or not Donald Trump talked out of the top of his hat or whether or not he was just being crafty. Donald Trump again. More coming up. Noor Rothman this hour. I'm going to talk with Eliana Johnson. I got a great group of guests, Michael Knowles, Alex Gray in the second hour, Senator Shelley Moore, Capito, Seth Mandel, Jim Garrity in hour number three. There's a lot ahead, a lot focused on on today's YOU Hewitt Show.
- [10:49]
Noah C. Rothman
One bad tenant, one late rent cycle. That's all it takes for your year to spiral. Turbotenant helps you prevent rental nightmares before they happen. With trusted screening, customizable leases, automated rent collection and timely maintenance tracking, you can stay ahead of every issue. Get started for free@turbotenant.com.
- [11:20]
Hugh Hewitt
Welcome back, America. I'm Hugh Hewitt, joined by Noah C. Rothman, senior editor at National Review. Noah, nothing happened in Iran, at least nothing that the United States wanted to make visible happen in Iran last night. The marchers have been cowed. Thousands have been murdered by a ruthless regime, thousands more imprisoned, no public executions. One that was scheduled did not come off. What do you think is happening? I have my own view, but let's hear yours first.
- [11:49]
Noah C. Rothman
Well, it's very difficult to get information out of the Islamic Republic, has been for several days, and there are disturbing reports that are completely understandable that the robust protest movement has been relatively dispirited. I don't know if I would say cowed, but certainly intimidated. Many of them are licking their wounds. Many of them have lost family and friends and are mourning them and are not allowed to do so publicly. And it's very dispiriting. From my perspective, this is revolutions like these and this is an uprising akin to a revolution, need momentum. And when momentum stalls, it can stall out permanently. We saw this after 2009. We saw something like it after 2022. We do need to keep up the momentum. And that's why the President and Republicans in Congress were right to say help is on the way, keep up the pressure, but it's incumbent on us to provide that, that assistance and to provide that assistance in a timely fashion. I share, I understand what you were saying in the previous segment. I share a lot of your concerns and willingness to suspend disbelief, not necessarily indict the administration just yet for its tardiness in meeting its own self set goals. But there's a reason why we're not acting as rapidly as we are. And that's because the carriers are not in the gulf as they should be.
- [13:07]
Hugh Hewitt
Well, I don't know.
- [13:08]
Noah C. Rothman
11 carriers.
- [13:08]
Hugh Hewitt
No, I've got a son in law in carriers. I know a little bit about carriers. We only have four at sea at any time. They can't be everywhere. And the South China Sea was the direct threat. And we took Maduro out with the other carrier groups. Takes 10 days to get there. The revolution started seven days ago. So I'm not sure you can say they're not there and they should be.
- [13:29]
Noah C. Rothman
Well, you can say that. And we've had a lot of conversations about the Maduro raid. I think the Caracas raid was a tactical and strategic success, absolutely necessary incumbent on us to remove this node of control that Iran, China, Russia and to a lesser extent Cuba have used to project power and frustrate American objectives in the Western Hemisphere. But if those deployments prevented us from taking advantage, maximum advantage of this historic opportunity to defeat the most malignant regime on the planet Earth, the foremost projector of terrorism across the planet Earth, a regime that absorbs a lot of our resources, a lot of our time, a lot of our attention, and it makes Americans less safe. Prosperity will regard that mission, I believe, as a flight of fancy, as something that precluded us from pursuing national grand strategic objectives that were of objectively more importance.
- [14:22]
Hugh Hewitt
I think we agree on this. I think we agree that it would be wonderful if the regime collapsed. And I cannot wait to see what we do over the course of two months. But I don't. There was a conversation on a commentary podcast today and you listen to it every day. And I do. John was being the realist this morning. John Pod hort saying, I don't want to say the president tricked them into going into the streets because they actually aren't receiving any of our messages. They're blacked out. Those protests were organic. And when the president said miga and help is on the way and when he told me that they can't keep Killing their people. I do think he set the table for people to rely on that and for Israel to get ready to rely on that. But I don't think the Iranian people were marching because of that. I think they were marching because the rial went to 00 and it's not going to go back up either. I'm willing to give the President a couple of months to do something. I'm not sure he wantswe're in the regime change business. But the regime iteration business, I'm all for that. And I'm also all for.
- [15:23]
Noah C. Rothman
I just think months is too long. I just think months is too long. If we're talking about 20,000 casualties in the space of a week, it's too long. There will be no revolution in a month.
- [15:33]
Hugh Hewitt
Okay? I'm not that confident about what we know and don't know. And I'm not thinking revolution. I'm thinking about what happened. What's in America's national interest that they not have ballistic missiles? We now know it was in our national interest. Given the brutality the regime unveiled, we now know for sure that what Operation Midnight Hammer achieved ought to have been done decades ago. And we now know because they're crazy. There's a crazy regime full of just the evilest people in the world. I make up a word there. And we are very justified in doing whatever we can. And Israel is justified in taking out the missile threat. And help is on the way. Suggest help is on the way. But I think two months is a realistic timeframe. I mean, maybe we won't know until we can look back. Right?
- [16:21]
Noah C. Rothman
Exactly right. I am speculating about posterity, but I'm speculating with, I believe, some education behind it. I think you're right that the carrier group's position is not necessarily about offensive firepower, but defensive firepower.
- [16:33]
Hugh Hewitt
Correct.
- [16:34]
Noah C. Rothman
Which is absolutely critical for the defense of our allies and our neighbors. And we could use long range assets like we used in Operation Midnight Hammer to execute these strikes. Although that's really heavy weaponry and it's not the sort of thing that I think we need to achieve here. We do have destroyers in the region. We do have, we have allied air bases and firepower that we could use to execute small scale symbolic strikes on targets that would select, for example, IRGC targets, besieged targets, the these institutions that are responsible for executing these attacks on civilians and probably the regime's most reliable institutions for regime survival. But you could also hit ballistic missile sites, ballistic missile production sites, even regime value targets like oil production, oil refineries, and what have you?
- [17:20]
Hugh Hewitt
Oh, that's what I want. Carg Island. I don't know why. And I'm going to ask Michael Duran, who's an actual Iran expert, next week, why is Karg island still pumping out oil? It's not helping the Iranian people. It enriches the irgc. It helps China. Why is it still there? And the missile production facilities. But what I want to come back around to, Noah, is impatience with President Trump. I hear it on the Republican side among people who call themselves neocons. I'm not. I'm a Reagan conservative. I'm a Nixon realist. And I think he's doing fine and we can't judge yet. I do think he set the table for the world to rely on him doing something and that he will be scorned if he doesn't. I think that's the reality. Do you agree with that?
- [18:05]
Noah C. Rothman
I absolutely do. But I just think that we have to emphasize the timeframe, which I just think is far shorter than months, even weeks. I think the clock is ticking. I think the regime has demonstrated that it has no regard for its legitimacy, that it will kill its way to survival because the regime and the clerisy believe that if the regime collapses they will draw their last breaths. The stakes are higher for them than they are for us and higher for the protesters than they are for us. And I just think we're flittering away time that is of the essence. We end up acting in several weeks time, but there won't be a revolution.
- [18:41]
Hugh Hewitt
In the streets if people listen to Haviv Reddy Gore yesterday, his Ask Aviv Anything podcast, he emphasized the durability of this maniacal regime. We cannot, we have to be very sober minded about what can and cannot be done. And I don't want to encourage people to go out and demonstrate on the assumption that we're about ready to send in the 101st Airborne of the 82nd. That's not realistic, is it, Noah?
- [19:06]
Noah C. Rothman
No, I don't think so either. I don't think this administration envisions a presence on the ground. But that's part of the self limiting thing about this. I don't necessarily want boots on the ground either. I don't think that would be, that would be effective or would achieve the objectives we want to achieve. But the notion here that you can collapse a regime from the air is, lacks a lot of supporting evidence or really any supporting evidence. You need support on the ground if you want to pursue a Libya style operation here, which seems like what the president is envisioning you need the support of activists on the ground, armed activists who are demonstrating against the government and are demonstrating in ways that are that can seize the institutions and the means of power that is available today on the ground in Iran. I don't think it'll be there in two, three weeks time.
- [19:49]
Hugh Hewitt
Okay, I did, I don't, I haven't seen any evidence of arms yet. That's, that's where the Second Amendment was needed in Iran. Noah C. Rothman of National Review, thank you. I'll be right back, America. Stay tuned. Welcome back, America. I'm Doug Hewitt, joined now by Eliana Y. Johnson, editor in chief of the Washington Free Beacon, contributor to the Commentary podcast, longtime friend of the program. Eliana, you and the Commentary gang were in my ears. I went up the implacable hill that I try and go up every morning this morning, and I kept waiting for one of you to use the word realism. I know you studied national security realism at Yale. You had, like Charles, whatever his last name is, the original realist. So why didn't anyone say he's just a realist about when and how he can get stuff done in Iran? And we it's too soon to tell what we've done.
- [20:39]
Eliana Johnson
You know, Hugh, I'm sympathetic to your point here. I think, you know, the point I made in less articulate terms was that I think it's wrong, I think it's totally wrong to, to call Trump an isolationist. I think his opposition to neoconservatism has been confused with isolation, with isolationism, wrongly. And I think Trump has absolutely no problem with the projection of American power, as we've seen both in his first administration and in this administration. I'm also sympathetic to the point you've to the point you've made about his posture on Iran here, where the situation is complicated and it's going to take time to figure out where this is all going to land. I think if we zoom out for a second, it's important to note that Iran's aspirations to be a regional superpower are over, and that is thanks in part to the actions of President Trump and Israel and his support for Israel. And he deserves credit for driving the situation to this point through Operation Midnight Hammer and his support for Israel's campaigns to decapitate Iran's regional proxies.
- [21:53]
Hugh Hewitt
Yeah, that's exactly what I think, Eliana. And I thought I heard impatience, especially from Christine and Abe. John wasand you were being very realist. Seth was being very realist. But who was your national security professor at Yale? What was his name.
- [22:11]
Eliana Johnson
His name was Professor Charles Hill. He passed away a few years ago, but he was a speechwriter for Henry Kissinger, and then he was the executive aide to George Shultz when he was Secretary of State in the Reagan administration. And he was famous for his note taking. He didn't say much during his government service, but he took legions of notes. And he was an incredible listener. I recommend to your listeners a book about him by Molly Worthen, who was a fellow student of mine at Yale and was one of his students, called the man on Whom Nothing Was Lost.
- [22:44]
Hugh Hewitt
Oh, that's fabulous. I didn't know about it. The Man Upon Whom Nothing Was Lost. He was, like Kissinger and like Nixon, an uber realist, which is, what are America's national interests? How do we defend them? How do we do it at minimum cost? Nixon used to say, no more Vietnams. I think everyone's gonna say no more Iraqs. But what we do know now, based on the ruthlessness of this regime over the last week, good thing they don't have nukes or are close to nukes, because they'd use them. Now we have to start thinking about their ballistic missiles, and we have to start thinking about the fact that if we hit them, we want the Lincoln Carrier strike group there to help Israel defend while Israel methodically reduces the missile capacity like they did in June during the 12 Day War. I just thought Christina and Abe were perhaps a little judgmental. The President has gone out on a limb. He said, help is on the way. Miga. He said all those. He said them on the show last week. He's led people to believe he's going to do something, but the timeframe, I just think we've got to be, I might say, on March 15, St. Patrick Bay. I'm very disappointed in Donald Trump, but not yet. Am I being too forgiving?
- [23:54]
Eliana Johnson
No. Look, I'm with you on this, but I think you can argue it both ways. He did seemingly draw a red line, but it wasn't clear what he was going to do. He said, if they continue to mow down protesters, we are going to act. We won't allow it to happen. And he said, help is on the way. I would note you. You noted that the USS Lincoln is being relocated from the South China Sea to the Middle East. One important piece of information that we learned today is that Israel has pressed the United States. This is reporting in the New York Times and Axios. Who knows how accurate that is, but that Prime Minister Netanyahu spoke with both the President and The vice president yesterday reportedly and asked them to wait on any military action. I think that's an important piece, information. And also that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant announced sanctions and a fresh round of sanctions through the Office of Foreign assets control, designating 18 people who oversee the country's security forces in the law enforcement forces in Iran and the irgc, including Ali Laranjani. This in the secretary of the Supreme Council of National Security there, the guy who went on Brett Baer and was talking tough and that is intended to inflict further economic damage on the regime. So both of those pieces of information suggest to me that we're in the middle of something, not at the end of something. Look, we could be wrong, but I think it's complicated and I'm sympathetic to where Trump is on them. I think the regime has been humiliated. It's broke, it's isolated, it's been humiliated militarily, economically.
- [25:39]
Hugh Hewitt
And.
- [25:41]
Eliana Johnson
Trump is trying to be judicious in the action that he does take. If he acts, I think he wants it to be decisive. And that's hard to figure out how to do that.
- [25:51]
Hugh Hewitt
I'm going to phrase it. I think we're at the end of the beginning. We're not in the middle yet because it takes carrier groups 10 days to three weeks to get where they're going to go. So the end of the beginning. I also wanted to. If Raisin Cain comes back to him, I think he relies on the vice president, Secretary Hexith Rubio, Michael Waltz to a lesser extent and raising Cain. And if they come to him and say we need three or four weeks, but if Netanyahu says we need a month, they're going to give him a month. Right, because they're in the ballistic missile path. That's the trajectory. They hit Israel more than they hit us. I want a quick question. Do you think we should blow up Kharg Island? I don't know that that oil helps the Iranian people at all. It only helps China. Why isn't that on the target list?
- [26:37]
Eliana Johnson
I have to say, Hugh, I'm not in the weeds enough to be able to say we should hit this target or that target. You're asking the wrong person there. I would be. I would be pretending to expertise that I don't have. I will leave that to raise and Cain. But I did think that the piece of information that Bibi leaned on the president and asked him to wait was important because it is Bibi who identified the ballistic missiles, not just the nuclear program, as an existential threat to Israel a couple of months ago when Israel and the US Went after, after the nuclear program.
- [27:09]
Hugh Hewitt
And if they are reloading the arrow capacity, if they're reloading David's sling, and there are some reports I've read in the Israeli English language press that that's not quite reloaded yet, that would, that would doubly make your point. Eliana Y. Johnson, good to hear you on the Commentary podcast. Everyone should be reading the Washington Freak Beacon. We'll talk to you again soon. Don't go anywhere. America, I'm Hugh Hewitt. Good evening, Grace. America, I'm Hugh Hewitt from the Relief Factor Studio West. Pleased to welcome Michael Knowles, who you know from the Daily Wire podcast that his name is on. Michael, welcome. I want everyone to go to the Michael Knowles podcast. I want to know, though, at the top, I just had Eliana Johnson on. She's a Yalie like you. She took Charles Hill. Did you take Charles Hill when you were at Yale?
- [27:57]
Michael Knowles
But of course I did, Hugh. There were only about two and a half Republican conservative professors at Yale, maybe, and Charles Hill, truly a great man of blessed memory, I think now there are negative two and a half Republican professors at Yale. So ave atque Vale, I guess.
- [28:14]
Hugh Hewitt
Yeah. Well, I'm glad you did because that means you had an uber realist foreign policy national security professor like Eliana. As an uber realist myself, I want to know what Michael Knowles thinks about what Donald Trump has said to me, to Sean Hannity, to Tony, dubbed Kopel on X on posted on Truth Social about Iran. What do you think is going on? Did he bait and switch or are we at the end of the beginning or at the end of the end, what do you think is going on?
- [28:44]
Michael Knowles
You know, President Trump's realism is something that I think has confounded a lot of his, even his supporters, because of this phrase, America first, which some people, especially very ideological people, took to mean that Trump would only focus on the home front. But that obviously isn't what he did. I mean, even going back to the first term, he drops the Moab, speaking of Iran, he kills Soleimani all the way up to recent events in Venezuela. So obviously what he wants is to project American strength around the world. And I think what he wants to do is just do it in a cheap way. So maybe Venezuela is the best way to look at this. President Trump carried out the Biden Harris policy, which was the policy, rather going all the way back to the Bush administration, which was that the Chavez and then Maduro regimes were unacceptable. So we wanna get rid of These guys, he just. He did it in a way that Biden couldn't do it, and he did it by saving $25 million along the way. I think that's what you're seeing play out with Iran. You know, I'm not the first person to observe he is trying to be unpredictable. I think that's a feature, not a bug, of his foreign policy. However, you know, it is very telling. I thought that Hazoni on Twitter, one of Yoram Hazoni's sons, made a great point about this, which is, you know, there are many people who are hoping for the toppling of the regime in Iran. It is far from clear, though, what will happen after that occurs and whether or not that would actually be good for Israel, whether or not that would actually be good for the United States. And so, you know, obviously, Trump's policy has been one of maximum pressure. What comes next, you know, remains to be seen.
- [30:23]
Hugh Hewitt
See, I am agreement with you. I am just not ready to condemn the president for bait and switch, because I think it takes time to set up. Like it took two months to get ready to grab Maduro. It's going to take some time to help us on the way to Iran doesn't have a date stamp on it. And if Eliana Johnson is correct and sources in Israel are saying Prime Minister Netanyahu asked the president to delay, I believe that General Kaine probably said, we're not ready yet. Let's get the link in there. And so I just think we're at the beginning of Iran Part 2. Let Me Talk to you about Greenland, because I was on Fox News this morning with Dana Perino, and they asked me about Greenland and my point of view. I know you did your podcast about it today, but I haven't heard it yet. I've been in my own studio. My point of view is it's three times the size of Texas. It's got 60,000 people on it, 95% of whom are Inuit natives and 5% or 7% of whom are Danes. Denmark is fine. They're a lovely ally. They sent 18,000 troops to Afghanistan with us. They're part of NATO. They cannot defend the exclusive economic zone around the Greenland enormous island. It's 27,000 miles of coastland. Off each of those miles, for 230 miles out to sea is their exclusive economic zone. We need that to keep the Chinese from fishing it out, and we need that for Golden Dome. So we should get it, and the Danes should say, thank you very much. What do you think?
- [31:56]
Michael Knowles
I agree entirely Hugh, and, you know, President Trump has articulated this from the Oval Office. He said, yes, the Danes are, you know, threatening to double their security. They're going to add an extra dog sled. I also thought it was charming when Mr. Macron said that he was going to be sending French forces to, you know, I don't know, carry out some exercises with the Danes. I happen to have the flag, flag of the French army with me right here. You know, none of us are terribly quaking in our boots, I think, because of that. But furthermore, the whole framing is ridiculous. This isn't even a hostile action against Denmark or against France or NATO or Europe or anything like that. The simple fact is we are the United States. We are the protectors of the free world. We certainly, as a cornerstone of American foreign policy, protect the Western Hemisphere. And we just cannot allow our adversaries to take advantage in Greenland. So, you know, if Hamlet hadn't fallen, you know, if Denmark had remained a really strong power, then maybe we wouldn't have to do this. But we do, and we're going to do it. And I hope everyone gets on board, because really, this is helpful to the entire West.
- [33:03]
Hugh Hewitt
Well, what makes me crazy is that everyone want, and I am a big fan of NATO. I want us to be deeply involved in NATO. I wanted them to get to 2%. The president got them there. I want them to get to 5%. He's going to get them there. We're sending weapons to Ukraine. I'm in favor of that. But if they need us this much, can they please just shut up about Greenland? Because they can't keep the Chinese fishing fleet out. They've got 20 ships in Denmark, and people don't know. The Chinese go around the world with the largest fishing fleet in the world, and they fish out entire regions. Like, they almost killed the Galapagos off. Does your audience know that they're just predatory?
- [33:43]
Michael Knowles
You know, I don't know. There are probably some people in the audience, especially the Zoomers, who are a little more fluid on their politics, who might not recognize that we do have adversaries around the world. I think sometimes people, they get too ideologically abstract. And in some ways, this is a foreign operation. You saw it online, with ops from Russia in particular, to try to ideologize everything. But the fact is Russia has a bunch of missiles pointed at us, and China is our chief geopolitical adversary. And politics is about more than abstractions and ideas on paper. It's about resources, it's about geography, it's about proximity. It's about oil, in fact, and it's about fishing, for that matter. And so, you know, getting back to a very realistic foreign policy. Trump gets that, and he's blunt about it, you know, and so he's been talking about this for a very long time. People wrote him off initially. It's been the policy of the U.S. state Department since the middle of the 19th century to acquire Greenland. Trump, once again, just seems like the guy who's actually gonna do it.
- [34:46]
Hugh Hewitt
So, two minutes. Michael, your assessment of what has happened to the left. They are going, in my view, over the left cliff. I think they're bringing along all the old moderates that they had left, and that a few of them are saying, what in the world is going on? But they are just fully committed to AOC land, and it's a fantasy land of Ben Rhodes and Barack Obama and John Kerry, and we can't throw them a rope because there isn't enough rope in the world to get them to climb back to reality.
- [35:14]
Michael Knowles
Absolutely. This joke that somehow the Dems are going to moderate. You saw Gavin Newsom try this to me, the canary in the coal mine, he launched that podcast and he said, you know what? I'm going to become friends with Charlie Kirk. I'm gonna become friends with Steve Bannon. I'm gonna position myself as a Bill Clinton for the2020s. And what happened? Five seconds later, he's up to his old tricks. He's calling Stephen Miller a fascist. He says he wants to see more trans kids. One of the most psychotic utterances I've ever heard from an American politician. He just realized that that wasn't going to work, and so I'm gleeful about it. It's too bad for my old city in New York. I feel bad for those guys out there up in Momdanistan. But, you know, that's the way their party is going, and it gives a lot of leeway for the Republicans. Never underestimate the ability of a Republican to clutch defeat from the jaws of victory. But right now, our opponents are putting us in a good spot.
- [36:07]
Hugh Hewitt
You know, Gavin Newsom's podcast reminds me of Ben Shapiro as editor of Politico Playbook. It lasted like a day because the left can't accommodate it. They really don't know how to sit down and have an argument. And in my day, I'm older than you. I'm a generation ahead of you. But your day, I'll bet you had some sort of sane liberals, right? Henry Jackson, liberals. Scoop Jackson, liberals at Yale, Were they in existence in your day, there were.
- [36:36]
Michael Knowles
Still, you know, some fleeting few. In fact, I have a debate show. We filmed one of them last night called Bar Fight. And we had one guy who's trying to position himself as a moderate Democrat, Adam Mockler. He goes on CNN a fair bit. And he kept trying to make the Democratic Party much more moderate and reasonable, but we had another liberal on the panel, and when he would do it, I'd say, hey, hold on, I wanna check this. Do you really believe that as a Democrat and just would get smacked down every time.
- [37:03]
Hugh Hewitt
Is Bar Fight a podcast or is it a only YouTube video? Where do we find Bar Fight?
- [37:08]
Michael Knowles
I think as of now, it's only been released on YouTube. But you make a good point, Hugh. I think we gotta get it out there all over the place and maybe reveal where the fissures really lie.
- [37:18]
Hugh Hewitt
Oh, I love that idea. Because if you can find, I mean, even remotely comprehensible leftists, I would like to hear them try and defend the people to their left, which cannot be done, as you say, in Momdanistan. Michael, good to have you on. Michael Knowles and I met up in a green room, and I said, it's been too wild. We just got to get you on. Thank you, Michael. Don't go anywhere, America. I'm coming back with Alex Gray, CEO of American Global Strategies. He was the chief of staff in Trump 1 on the National Security Council. I want to talk to him about Cargill, and I want to talk to him about Iran. I want to talk to him about how long it takes to position American assets for anything remotely approaching a big strike on Iran. So always talk to the experts. Tune into the Hugh Hewitt. Welcome back, America. I'm Hugh Hewitt, joined now by Alex Gray. Alex is the CEO of American Global Strategies. In the first Trump term, he was the Chief of Staff at the National Security Council under our friend Ambassador Robert o'. Brien. Alex, welcome. I have been talking nonstop about Iran and what did not happen last night. An American strike and whether or not we should draw any conclusions from that. And into that picture came more information today that the Lincoln Strike Group has begun to be deployed to the Middle East. And Prime Minister Netanyahu has asked Donald Trump to slow down a little bit. What's your assessment of this situation?
- [38:43]
Alex Gray
Yeah, thanks, Hugh. I think the President's got two things going for him. One is ambiguity. You know, we always associate strategic ambiguity with Taiwan. But as you know, well, the President has said for years, one of the things he admires about President Nixon was the madman theory. And he Loves the fact that leaders don't know what he's going to do. And he's demonstrated whether it was Midnight Hammer in the summer or it was the Caracas operation. He has re injected that element of uncertainty into our global posture and it keeps adversaries like Iran on their toes. So he's got that going for him. The second thing he has is he's restored deterrence just because of the operations I mentioned, the successful terrorist strikes against terrorists that he's done since he came back. The sense from his first term that the President doesn't pull his punches. There's no more Afghanistan debacle, there's no more failure of deterrence in Ukraine. Between those two things, return of ambiguity and the return of deterrence, I think we have a situation where the Iranians are taking a much more measured approach than we have seen them take to previous protests.
- [39:53]
Hugh Hewitt
Now there are thousands of people alleged to be dead in Iran and they stopped doing it last night. If whatever little gets out of Iran is correct, we really don't know because they've been blacked out. I have been arguing that we can't draw any conclusions about President Trump's promises on this show last week to Sean Hannity, to Tony decopal and on truth social media, because there's just not enough time to stage something. You were there at the National Security Council. How long would it take to stage the assets you need to make a meaningful strike on the Iranian regime that would in any way advance America's national interest or help the protesters? Because he said help is on the way. Yeah.
- [40:35]
Alex Gray
You know, Hugh, it doesn't take really. It doesn't take that much depending on what you're trying to accomplish now. Is it a demonstration effect? Is he going to use this as an opportunity? Opportunity to degrade regime targets that are used for repression? Is he going to use it as an opportunity to go after leadership targets? Is he going to try and go after. Is this aimed at the missile program and elements of the nuclear program that maybe survived Midnight Hammer? I mean, where he's actually focused is going to determine to a great extent what type of assets are needed. I would be very much remiss, Hugh, if I didn't mention the fact that a lot of these assets were stage out of the American base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. And this week the British House of Lords was actually debating whether to turn that base, the island, that base sits on, over to the nation of Mauritius, which is a Chinese influenced country heavily influenced by the Chinese Communist Party. That is a Very real threat to the type of asset allocation that you're talking about here. But, but long story short, depending on the target, we can put a lot of potential assets in place relatively quickly.
- [41:47]
Hugh Hewitt
The Abraham Lincoln and the strike group with it has been redirected from the South China Sea to the Middle East. About how long does that take? Alex Gray I don't know how fast carriers go or how long it takes to get a carrier strike group or how the fastest ship leads. What's your estimate? Two weeks.
- [42:05]
Alex Gray
Depending on how quickly you're willing to move them. And if you're willing to spend the, you're willing to spend the money, you're willing to steam them at their fastest speed, probably about a week. If you want to, if you want to do it, if you have an exigent circumstance, I think you do, about a week.
- [42:23]
Hugh Hewitt
All right. Now the next thing I want to ask you is about Carg island. And I've tried a couple of people thus far and they've waved me off. I got Michael Duran coming on next week who can tell me about it. Does Carg island benefit the people of Iran in any way? It benefits the regime. They sell their oil through Carg Island. It goes to China, so it helps China. Is it a legitimate target or is it something we ought to say? No, we can't do that for A, B and C reasons.
- [42:48]
Alex Gray
Yeah, I wouldn't rule out at this point. I wouldn't take things off the list because the goal here, Hugh, is to influence regime behavior. I think the moment they get a sense that the administration is willing to start bracketing certain things for arbitrary reasons. And you know, Michael Duran's is a friend and he's super smart on these issues. But I think on this I would be very hesitant to take anything off the table, particularly publicly while we're trying to alter how the mullahs are calculating their interests.
- [43:20]
Hugh Hewitt
Now, I also want to go back to term one. I said on Fox News this morning, Dana Perino, Greenland was on the table in the first Trump term. It's back on the table and he knows he's got three years left and he wants to get it done. And God bless the Danes, all 6 million of them. But there's 230 miles of exclusive economic zone, around 27,000 miles of coastland, and they can't protect that from the Chinese fishing fleet, much less hypersonic missiles. How serious do you rate the acquisition of Greenland as an inevitability? How do you, how do you think it's going to happen?
- [43:54]
Alex Gray
Oh, Hugh, I think it's going to happen one way or the other. I don't think this is a question of whether, it's a question of how. I think it's important for everyone to understand something. This is not a Donald Trump phenomenon. American presidents since Andrew Johnson have been trying to do this. Woodrow Wilson, FDR actually occupying Greenwood, Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower. That's not because this is a Trumpian pet project. That's because there is an intrinsic strategic value in Greenland's location. Chinese submarines go past Greenland all the time headed to the North Pole. The Wall Street Journal reported this. The Danes didn't even know about it. According to the public reporting, we have right now the ability to put substantial assets on Greenland under the 1951 agreement. I hope the administration takes full advantage of that and puts as many assets, including anti submarine warf assets on Greenland now. But that doesn't negate the fact that ultimately Hugh, Greenland's going to be independent. They were on that path for 50 years. The president's rhetoric has kind of led them to, to hedge a little bit. What's ultimately going to happen though. They will be independent. And when they are, the choice is very clear. Are they going to be gobbled up and coerced by the Chinese like the Solomon Islands and like countries in Africa, or are they going to have a relationship with the United States, whether that's a direct one like an insular area like Virgin Islands or Guam? Or are they going to be an independent country in free association with the United States like the Marshall Islands or Palau? That's the question.
- [45:23]
Hugh Hewitt
Now, when we say that, and we've got a minute, what does that mean? Say vis a vis the comparison with Puerto Rico? I was thinking they could be sovereign like Puerto Rico, but also a commonwealth. What does that mean to be in association with.
- [45:37]
Alex Gray
So a free contact of free association would be, to use the example of the Marshall Islands, they'd be an independent state. They would be have representation at the un they would conduct their own foreign policy, but they would have their defense would be the responsibility of the United States. They would have unlimited access for the United States for military purposes. And we would very importantly have the right of denial. So we would be able to deny another power access to their land, air or sea. That is, I think, a great option that would allow Greenland to keep its sovereignty. The other option, as you were talking about, Hugh, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, it could be a direct territory of the United States administered by the Interior Department with elements of local self government. That's also a great option.
- [46:22]
Hugh Hewitt
Alex Gray, I always come to you for actual experience on the questions of the day. Thank you so much. CEO of American Global Strategies, Alex Gray on Greenland. Coming back with Selena Zito. Stay tuned. Welcome back, America. I'm Hugh Hewitt joined by Selena Zito. Selena Zito is the author of Butler. I like to say she is President Trump's favorite journalist because I think she is. She is, of course, for my new audience, the person who coined the term about seriously and literally, that is the left takes the president literally but not seriously. And Trump supporters take the president seriously but not literally. Applying your lens and your experience, Selena, what does his messaging about Iran mean to you?
- [47:10]
Selena Zito
Stay tuned. I think it means that we're not done here there and I'm not going to show my hand. And I think he showed us that with Venezuela, right? You leave, you led up to Venezuela all fall like something's going to happen. Something's going to happen, something's going to happen. There was three weeks where nobody thought something was going to happen and then something happened. So I think he likes.
- [47:39]
Hugh Hewitt
I don't.
- [47:40]
Selena Zito
Know if this stagecraft sort of element of surprise, but he doesn't like as much as people think he wants to show his hand. He does not want to show his hand on this at all.
- [47:50]
Hugh Hewitt
On this program. Last week the president said if the Iranians keep killing their people, we're going to go in. And then he said on truth, social help is on the way. Miga make Iran great again. Then he told Sean Hannity that then he told Tony decouple that if they keep killing their people, they haven't killed their people for a day that we know about. I think we're at the end of the beginning. I don't even think we're at the middle of this show yet. But I do think he's going to do what he can to help the people of Iran. But it's got to fit in America's national interest. Do you agree?
- [48:23]
Selena Zito
100%. Agree with you. 100%. It's always been the people that confuse sort of what happened in Venezuela and what's happening in Iran as not being America first. Don't have the, don't, don't have the concept of nuance and understanding long term impact, not just economically but also safety wise. And so I think that the way he deliberates things is America first. But I again, I just say sit back and, and just watch because whatever you think is going to happen, you're not meaning you. Right. But critics in particular, you've Never really understood him. And you continue to show that you.
- [49:14]
Hugh Hewitt
So the last subject in this list is Greenland. I was on Fox with Dana Perino today and I said, he's serious about Greenland. He was serious about Greenland in the first term. He's even more serious about Greenland in this term. And that something's got to get worked out here because the Danes can't protect Greenland from the Chinese communist fishing fleet, much less their hypersonics. What do you think?
- [49:39]
Selena Zito
Yeah, I think he's very serious about Greenland. And I am so bummed out. I was invited to go by J.D. vance's to go to Greenland when he went over the summer. But it was the same week my book came out and it was just not something I could do. No, but no, this is Alaska all over again. Except people don't have the historic understanding of why Alaska was important because it was 1867. Eventually it was 1959, but there was a strategic reason why we didn't that right. Post the Civil War. The same thing that went for Hawaii, Right? I mean, all you have to do is look at a map. I think more people need geography, right? Oh, yes, look at Greenland. And then you go, oh, now I get it.
- [50:32]
Hugh Hewitt
Last question. Your most recent column is about batteries. And of course it's about a Western Pennsylvania Battery company. Do I need to read this? I mean, I don't care about electric cars. Do I need to know about Western Pennsylvania Battery companies? Right.
- [50:47]
Selena Zito
So everyone's been talking about AIs taking away their job. AI is taking away their job. Well, in places like where we grew up, Eastern Ohio, western Pennsylvania, West Virginia, the people that are making the data power sensors centers that are supplying them with the workforce, but also the intellect. Coming from Case, Western, coming from Pitt, coming from cmu. All an incubation of layers of. Of a workforce that are going to make and supply the energy for a data power centers. If there's going to be a sea change, it's going to be about how it's the opposite of what happened to us in 77. You in that the very workers that that DNA that was taken away are now the people that are going to have the most impact in our economy.
- [51:44]
Hugh Hewitt
I sure hope you're right for not just Pittsburgh. Sorry about Mike Tomlin. Good things can't last forever. I know you're Yinzer and you're a Steelers fan, but he got tired of you. 19 years. A good run. But I outlasted him. Selena Zito. So did you follow Selena on X at Zito Selena get all of her columns by signing up for them@selenazito.com and come right back, America. More national security coming up. Josh Croshauer next on the Hugh Hewitt Show. Welcome back, America. Hugh Hewitt and relief actors video West. I'm joined by Josh Croshauer on the Hugh Hewitt Show. He's editor in chief of the Jewish Insider. Josh, welcome. Two headlines for you from the Wall Street Journal at this hour. Trump was told attack on Iran wouldn't guarantee collapse of regime. The president was advised that the US Military would need more firepower in the Middle east to launch a large SC attack. And second headline, iran's Heavy Crackdown Quiets protests. An Internet shutdown has made it difficult to determine the scale of the protest, but some Iranians say an eerie quiet has taken over. What's your assessment of the situation both there and inside Donald Trump's inner ring?
- [53:02]
Josh Croshauer
Well, Hugh, let's take things back a couple days when Trump posted on his Truth Social page, help is on the way to the Iranian protest. So there's been a widespread expectation, not just within Washington, but among the overall public that there would be some kind of military action. Now, when and how it was sort of the big question mark. But there was a sense that Trump, you know, kind of put, put his words behind the likelihood of some kind of military strike against Iran. The big challenge, Hugh, and I think you kind of raised that in the first headline, which, which is that they're really the Pentagon until earlier this week, hadn't moved any forces in preparation for potential military strikes. And there was some reporting in the last few hours that a lot of the US Gulf state allies, including Saudi Arabia, but also Israel, were a little bit concerned about the timing of a strike that they wanted. And in the case of Israel, I think they wanted more time to prepare about the after effects of any potential military strike against Iran. So look, I think there are two ways of looking at this. I think one way of looking at it is that there may the White House might want more time to see what's going on in Iran, but also to build the military presence up in the Middle east, which was pretty, pretty sparse as of earlier in the week. But there also may be some second second guessing within the White House and there may be there may be some factions looking to try to get an off ramp and, and not go through with any military action. So a little bit of uncertainty and what the White House is eventually going to do. But just because nothing has happened yet doesn't mean it's not going to happen.
- [54:41]
Hugh Hewitt
That's it? I'm gonna come back and ask you what is the window for saying he cried wolf because he did say help is on the way. He did urge Iranian protesters to take over their institutions. And some commentators are saying bait and switch. He got people killed? I don't think so. I think that he's got at least a month and probably two months to do something. He did turn the Abraham Lincoln strike group, the Cat Carrier Lincoln and the strike group that accompanies it left. They're heading back to the Middle east from the South China Sea. And we don't know what's going on, but we know that the carrier strike force is on the way. Second bit of information, I don't know if you can confirm this. Eliana Johnson told me Netanyahu called him and said, not yet. We need more time. What do you think about those two pieces of information?
- [55:31]
Josh Croshauer
So we don't have that independently confirmed. We are looking into it on the Israeli side. But the New York Times and I believe Barack Ravid Axios said that Israel did counsel patience. I think there, there's a lot of concern in Israel of what Iran would do in case of a US Military strike, the fear being that, that, that Iran would take out or would respond by attacking Israel. So I think there is concern in Israel and Netanyahu may have expressed those concerns. It does seem to be on the public reporting that it's more of a question of timing and preparation. But it's not just Israel. It's a lot of the Gulf state, all allies. There was also reporting in the same New York Times story that Saudi Arabia, also Qatar, were very, very aggressively advocating the Trump administration not to go ahead with military strikes against Iran. And who knows if that had any bearing on Trump's decision making. But there is a lot of, a lot of competing guidance that Trump is getting. And you could tell when he had that public availability yesterday at the White House that Trump at least had changing his tune and sounded like he was willing to accept the notion that some of the actually, I guess he was talking about one specific execution, but also that some of the massacres were not taking place anymore. I mean, as far as I know, we don't really know what's going on on the ground in Iran. And I would not take the Iranian government's word for any credibility.
- [56:55]
Hugh Hewitt
That brings me to the Brett Baer interview, Josh. A foreign minister last night said Mossad was killing Iranians in order to bring Donald Trump into the war that is ongoing between Iran and Israel. It was crazy talk did you hear that? Do you have a reaction to it?
- [57:12]
Josh Croshauer
I did, yeah. I mean, it reminded me of like when we going back to the Iraq war, when you saw, well, Baghdad Bob spouting the most inane propaganda from his palace. Yeah, the Iranian. I mean, it just shows how desperate. I think there were all kinds of just ridiculous propaganda coming from the Iranian regime. Regime both in the interview, interview on Fox with Brett Baier, but also in separate interviews that they gave to other media outlets. But yeah, I mean, this, this is how desperate and how deranged, frankly, this Iranian regime this is. The foreign minister was talking to Brett and he sounded as, as crazy and extreme and just deluded as you would expect from any dictatorship that has lost touch with his people.
- [57:54]
Hugh Hewitt
So given that the president did touch, tell the people of Iran, help is on the way. What's your time frame for assessing whether or not that was chatter or that was real?
- [58:07]
Josh Croshauer
Hugh, you said a month or two. You know, I would say a week or two. You know, I'm hearing different from different sources are kind of having different reactions to what's happened in the last 24 hours. Some are actually bullish that there could be a larger scale action, that there's more coordination taking place behind the scenes scenes, which is certainly possible. Lindsey Graham, who has been very vocal on this issue, is actually going to be in Israel. He actually is just leaving, I think, today to go and meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu. So there may be more coordination, more conversation taking place for a wider scale operation. The other option, which I think is very possible as well, is that there may be trying to walk back some of the rhetoric that was made and maybe just willing to take a, a small loaf if there isn't any, you know, any more horrible, violent crackdowns. Maybe Trump is willing to take that and willing to, you know, pause on any operations for now.
- [59:06]
Hugh Hewitt
So count that. I don't know that I can count that as a win. Can you count that as a win? Given that the numbers, I would not know.
- [59:13]
Josh Croshauer
The brutal regime, they're always going to be cracking out on their people and it's going to happen again. So I think, look, I think what we learned with Obama, the red line, the lookout, look how disastrous Obama not living up to his red line in Syria back in 2013 was. I think this is one of those.
- [59:28]
Hugh Hewitt
Similar moments when you put the American presidency on the table, you get a window, but if you don't act in that window, your credibility is badly damaged. I don't think Donald Trump wants that, but we will see. Josh Crosshair of Jewish Insider. Thank you. Don't go anywhere, America. I'll be right back. Coming up next hour as well, Shelley Moore, Cafeto senator from West Virginia, Seth Mandel from Commentary Garrity of National A lot ahead on the days you Hewitt show.
- [59:53]
Alex Gray
The home team has first and 10 in the closing minutes of the fourth quarter.
- [59:59]
Noah C. Rothman
Tired of missing the game because of your tenants? Let Turbo Tenant simplify rental management for you. It's free, easy to set up and you don't have to worry about missing out on the big moments. Get started for free@turbotenant.com still going brought.
- [60:12]
Hugh Hewitt
Down at the 50. Welcome back America. From Senator Shelley Moore Capito to Seth Mandel of the Commentary podcast where he's senior editor at Commentary and the Commentary podcast. Seth, I've already listened to Commentary's podcast today where four of you, you and Eliana and Christine Rosen and actually 5 Abe was there and Sean. We're trying to come up with how do we connect the dots of the Trump foreign policy Before I give you my assessment of your show, what do you think you five agreed on, if anything.
- [60:53]
Christine Rosen
That Trump cares about American power and influence in the world overall. So whether, you know, he doesn't seem to care whether there's a transition to or a quick transition to a, a full fledged democracy in Venezuela. He isn't sure how hard to go at Iran in terms of, you know, whether he really wants to force a regime change. But he knows that he doesn't want Iran being able to mess with us and he knows that he doesn't want Maduro's crew being able to mess with us. So I would say the common thread is power.
- [61:26]
Hugh Hewitt
Yeah, I agree with that. I was waiting for someone to say he's a realist. He's a Nixonian realist. List. What are the cards I've been dealt? What outcomes can I achieve? Where are my carriers? The one thing I don't think I heard any of you five say, the big development yesterday on our side is the Lincoln strike group was diverted from the South China Sea to go to the Middle East. I have a feeling I have no information. I'm just guessing. We need that strike group in the vicinity of Israel. Israel, if we strike Iran, because they'll go ballistic missile and we have to help Israel against the ballistic missiles. You were just in Israel. Did anyone brief you on the damage that the Iranian ballistic missile fusillade from June did?
- [62:16]
Christine Rosen
Yeah, we even met one of the missiles actually or a piece of the missile place. We were staying some shrapnel of an intercepted missile. Yeah, I mean, the damage is real. But Israel has degraded Iran's missile capabilities a great deal and Iran is essentially now in a race to try to rebuild those missile capabilities. I think that's why the window is now. Also, I think that they're less concerned about a full on Iranian response, but it's certainly possible. And it's also possible that there could be a response from Hezbollah and Lebanon, although they've been greatly weakened and they have signaled that they also don't really want to mess with the bull right now. So I think that the Israelis are not quite as the Israelis are not looking to start something up with Iran right now. And I think that they're fine with President Trump waiting. But I think that President Trump is the one that really is the prime mover on this and the Israelis are ready and willing to do their part in this, whatever that may be, most likely in ensuring that this doesn't turn into a regional war, regional conflagration, where in which Trump's critics can say, look what you started, you started a wildfire.
- [63:33]
Hugh Hewitt
Now, something I also heard yesterday, which I didn't hear you guys mention, is that Qatar had told the United States we may not use the air base in Qatar for missions in Iran. If that is in fact the case, we ought to move the air base. Do you agree with that?
- [63:46]
Christine Rosen
Yeah, the air base is, as of now, the air base is doing more harm than good because the Qataris are using it to shield themselves. So yeah, I mean, if we can't use it for what we need to use it for, what are we supposed to use? Supposed to use the air base in Qatar to what, launch satellites into space? I mean, it's an air base. If we can't use it as an air base, put it somewhere we can use it.
- [64:12]
Hugh Hewitt
So President Trump was on the program last week right at this time, and I asked him, I said, I think I've got a definition of the Trump Doctrine. Don't threaten Americans, don't kill Americans or we will kill you quicker and harder and longer. And he added, and don't send drugs into our country. But I guess you could include that in don't kill Americans. I think the Trump Doctrine is pretty easy, a very realism driven. What is in the best interest of the United States. Plus, what can I get done with a near certain guarantee of no fiasco. He doesn't want Eagle Claw, which was Desert One, Some people remembered it as Desert One. And he had General Kaine who I think he trusts a great deal and Secretary Rubio in the office when he was talking to me about this, that I think those two, plus J.D. vance, those are the big three and Pete Hexa, the big four with Trump. But their envelope to me, Seth, is that it's got to be able to work and we got to do second order impacts which might include these people are crazy in Iran, they're evil crazy. And I think they'd fire off everything they could at Israel, they can't. And maybe at our air base. And we have to get ready for that. I think that's what Cain told him, I'm guessing. But what do you think?
- [65:25]
Christine Rosen
Yeah, I think they have to be prepared for anything. But, and that's why you've seen embassies thin out in the region and, and stuff like that. But the main point is that this is, this is kind of offensive realism, I think is the tradition. You know, it's, it's more associated with, funnily enough, John Bolton and people like that than, you know, than sort of the neoconservatives. Because it basically means, you know, if you, if you threaten us or you hit us, we're going to hit back twice as hard where if you need to be punched in the nose, we're going to bloody you up and we're not going to clean up the mess. We're not going to stay there and help you transition to some sort of new government or whatever if you, you accept the consequences of your own actions. So if you pick a fight with us, you're going to be sorry and we're not going to hang around to clean up the mess. It's going to be your mess to clean up. So I think that that holds through all the members of the administration, just to different degrees.
- [66:23]
Hugh Hewitt
I agree with that.
- [66:23]
Christine Rosen
At what point they're willing to trigger that.
- [66:26]
Hugh Hewitt
I think that is exactly correct. I was on Fox this morning. Dana Perino got in a question about Venezuela because Ms. Machado's at the White House today, said that's great. I don't think we're there for regime change. We're for regime evolution and we like regime collapse, if that's what happens in Iran. But we're not into the regime change business as under understood. Iraq 2003, through the surge we took Maduro out. He was blocking change. The evolution has begun. We took another tanker today. We are in fact running Venezuela. But they're not ready for Machado to get back yet. And I'm okay taking time to get to where we need to go, but I like to play offense. I think he's just very Nixonian to me. Seth, I don't even think it's that complicated. I think there's a bit of anti Trumpism on the podcast today and Christine and maybe Abe a little bit is suspicious of him. But generally it's just Trump protecting American interests to the extent he can without courting disaster.
- [67:31]
Christine Rosen
I think so. I think he doesn't want chaos is the main thing. He doesn't want to get involved in something that he can't predict really where it's going to go. And so in Venezuela, it's not that he has a big problem with Machado, it's the that he doesn't feel she and her team are ready to take on the burden of a transition. He did this regarding Iran the other day too, where he said the former, you know, he said the crown prince Pahlavi is seems like a good guy, but I don't know, does he have the support? I'm not sure if he has it right now to be handed a country of 90 million people or whatever. So that's basically his thing is that he's not that he's opposed to a pro democracy leader like Pahlavi. It's just he's not going to do Pahlavi's work for him and he's not going to do much Machado's work for her. He's going to do his work for him and America's work for America. That's how he sees it. And so if you present to him a chaos free or reasonably chaos free plan to transition a government in Venezuela or in Iran, he will be listening. But for now he's not taking any chance.
- [68:34]
Hugh Hewitt
Yeah, I would frame it if you present to him a plan that will significantly advance a real genuine American interest at at relatively low cost, he will do it. And I'll talk with Seth after the break about what Israel is going to do, whether or not it helps the United States because they get to do what's in their interest to Stay tuned. Welcome back, America. Seth Mandela Commentary has hung around because the commentary podcast a very interesting conversation about what is the Trump Doctrine? And the answer is we don't know what it is as applied to Iran Part two yet. Seth, what is the timeframe that the average listener in the car or watcher on the Salem News Channel ought to have in their head to judge what the president did in Iran? Because he did say eight different times, help is on the way. Said it to me, said it on he posted it, he told it to Sean Hannity, he told it to Tony Decopol. And when Tony Decopol said they're going to be handy, he went, what hangings? That's out of line. So he did tell the Iranian people, we're going to help you. And we haven't done anything yet that we've seen. What's the time limit for deciding whether or not he baited and switched on the Iranian people?
- [69:49]
Christine Rosen
I think it's just a few days now. I think the fact that he said publicly, well, they appear to have stopped the killing or, you know, some version of that means there's days, because the Iranians have a window now and they're getting control of the protests. They're getting the demonstrations somewhat under control. And as long as they don't do anything like, as provocative as they were talking about public executions, things like that, they feel like they have a window now to try to slow things down. We don't have great eyes on the ground. I think it's just a few days before this inertia would settle in and become. Become permanent or semi permanent, for now, anyway.
- [70:30]
Hugh Hewitt
So I think I'm watching the Lincoln because I really do think that the strike carrier group has got missile defense capabilities that were used when Israel was attacked. And that brings me to Israel. Israel's got to go get the missile capability because it was overwhelming. If they keep building at the pace they are said to be building, they don't need the nuke. Plo. That was the great. We destroyed their. We obliterated their nuclear program. President Trump did that. But the great reveal was that ballistic missile program is a existential threat, too. Is that now recognized in Israel?
- [71:05]
Christine Rosen
Absolutely, yeah. Without question. That was something that wasn't talked about as much because the nuke was also the nuclear. The nuclear threat, excuse me, was also an existential threat, and it was a wider global threat, and it was, you know, easy for people to comprehend the danger of it. But there's no question that. That the Israelis understand and state clearly and openly that the ballistic missile program in Iran could also be an existential threat because they could simply overwhelm Israel's air defenses. We saw it last time, and it's not. It's not something that they could. It's not a button they could push tomorrow. But the program itself does represent an existential threat. And if they're going to race to get it back up, that's the deterrent they're looking for also, which means that if they, if they can get the ballistic missile program back, back up. They feel like they have a deterrent even without the nuclear program, because they know that they can overwhelm, overwhelm Israel's air defenses, at least for periods at a time. And therefore they'll be more likely to stave off any sort of Israeli strike and maybe even an American strike, you know, in that timeframe. So, yeah, the race to get the ballistic missile program up and running is a race to get Iran, Iran in a sort of field of protection again. And what it does inside that field of protection is not going to be anything that the United States or Israel likes.
- [72:28]
Hugh Hewitt
Last bit of information. There's nothing good about mowing down between 2 and 12,000 people and capturing as many people and sending them off to urban prison. Zero good. But there is a side effect, which is clarity about the nature of the regime and why they couldn't get nukes and why they can't have all the missiles. They'll do anything. They are Stalin esque and Mao esque. They don't care. They mowed down their own people. You think even the left wing in America has got to realize that jcpoa, Community of nations, Regional power, Barack Obama, Ben Rhodes, John Kerry nonsense is just that, nonsense. Now.
- [73:08]
Christine Rosen
I don't know if they realize it, but I hope so because what this is showing is that first of all, you who would trust them with any deal, whatever it said. And second of all, these are people who will obviously use any advantage they have to hurt America. They say it out loud, they mean it. They tried to kill President Trump twice, reportedly. But all of this, you know, the Yemenite missiles from Yemen, you know, being shot at American tankers. Also, there's no question, question that Iran wants to hurt America and is happy to hurt America. It's not just an Israeli concern. And I think that has been made obvious also because the people who have been screaming for two years about supposed Israeli atrocities in Gaza have not really found it in their hearts to muster the same emotion and valence for the protesters in Iran who are just being, as you, as you said, mowed down in the streets. It's not a war. It's not even a civil war. It's just the regime executing people in large numbers in public.
- [74:15]
Hugh Hewitt
A massacre. It's just a massacre. Seth Mandel, thank you for spending two segments with me. I will send everyone to the Commentary podcast, wherever podcasts are. Great discussion today about the nature of what President Trump has done or not done and whether or not he baited and switched. I don't think I think I'm giving them two months to figure out because strategic surprise is useful. Thank you. Seth Mandel. Don't go anywhere, America. Come back with Garrity, the indispensable next on the Hugh Hewitt show. Up, down. Got it, Tosslers. Well, you know what that music means, America. Jim Garrity, Garrity, the indispensable senior editor at National Review, host of the Three Martini podcast, columnist the Washington Post. He gets you the morning jolt every day if you sign up for it. Over@nationalreview.com Jim, I want to cut to the chase. Seth Mandel was just on for two segments. I listened to the Commentary podcast this morning. They're trying to figure out the Trump Doctrine. Did he bait and switch the Iranian people? My answer is the Trump Doctrine is pretty simple. Don't kill Americans, don't threaten Americans, don't send drugs in the United States. And if I think you're a long term threat and I can take you out, I'll take you out, but it better not be expensive or hurt Americans. I think he trusts General Kaine, Secretary Rubio, J.D. vance and Pete Hannah Hegseth. And I don't think, I think it's too soon to judge what's going on in Iran. All I saw happen yesterday was the Lincoln strike group turned left and is headed to the Middle East. What's your assessment of what the president has done or not done in Iran thus far? Sure.
- [75:47]
Jim Garrity
Yesterday's comments in the Oval Office really took me as surprise. Seemed like a reversal. Now you mentioned the Abraham Lincoln has left the South China Sea, is headed towards the area of Central Command, presumably the that includes the Persian Gulf. Maybe within a couple of days the president will have more options for military strikes than he did a couple of days ago. My colleague Noah Rothman a week ago noticed that we did not have a carrier group in the Middle east and wondered if that was going to become a headache. It's conceivable that it has. Trump both in his interview with you a week ago, setting news saying we're going to hit them hard if they kill their people. The Iranian mullahs and Ayatollah Khamenei have done nothing but kill their people since then. The estimates ranging from 2,500 to 20,000 people killed over the last week or so. And then on Truth Social, Trump goes on and says, you know, we are, you know, help is on the way. Miga make Iran great again. Now there are a lot of ways the president can hit the Iranians. It doesn't Necessarily mean it has to be airstrikes sent from, you know, U.S. bases or an aircraft carrier. There's cyber, there's psychological operations, there's a whole bunch of different ways you could theoretically do this. But, but to make those kinds of statements, it certainly indicated help is on the way and we're going to hit them hard if they keep. And then he comes out and he starts saying the killing is over, which is not necessarily what it looked like for a long time. Sounded like he'd heard from the Iranians, probably through an intermediary, maybe the Qataris or something. And they said that he mentions the executions are over. He keeps using the term killings and executions interchangeably. One of the figures who was getting the most attention, they said they were not going to execute, at least for now. Like, I'm glad to hear that. But that's one guy in a, you know, conflict that has already killed thousands, possibly tens of thousands of people. So I hope this is a feint. I hope that this is just the President trying to fake out the mullahs and make it sound like they've gotten off the hook. We're seeing statements from our Arab allies in the Gulf indicating that they think the moment of crisis has passed. If the President says, you know, help is on the way and we're going to hit these guys and then doesn't do it anything, this is going to be really bad. I think this is going to be remembered as an Afghanistan style moment in which the Iranian, by the way, the Iranian regime, whether or not it collapses in the next couple of months, their economic problems are not going away.
- [78:08]
Hugh Hewitt
Correct.
- [78:08]
Jim Garrity
It's not like their currency is suddenly going to be valued again. There you go. They can suppress this, this uprising, they can suppress these protests through extreme violence.
- [78:18]
Alex Gray
That's possible.
- [78:19]
Hugh Hewitt
Right?
- [78:19]
Jim Garrity
You know, but the problem is, is, is that once you do that, you're still there and you look at things. Scott Besant was on Newsmax last night. First of all, he explicitly refers to harming the protesters as a red line from President Trump. You know, I'm sure your listeners be having good memories, are sitting there and thinking like, whoa, that's giving me bad memories. We use the word term redline. That was Obama and Syria and the use of chemical weapons. The Trump administration prides itself on not being like the Obama administration administration and not failing to follow through once they draw these kinds of red lines. So it's conceivable this is just the president trying to, trying to fool him, trying to do a ruse. If a week from now, two weeks from now, three weeks from now, there has been no discernible US Effort against the regime for killing the protesters. Then I get real nervous. Then I think that we've really lost a great deal of our credibility, and an opportunity to really topple this regime might be slipping through our fingers.
- [79:13]
Hugh Hewitt
Jim, you answered the question. I wanted to know the timeframe in which the president has to act, because I do believe. I believe the Iranian people heard help is on the way quite clearly. They heard, take over your institutions. They heard, mega. They read miga. They are cut off from the outside world, but there's ways for information to get in, I think they thought. But there wasn't a timeframe there. I'm more generous than you. I'm saying by March 15, two months, because it takes a while to position assets, and the carrier group doesn't get there for 10 days, Jim. So it's, you know, if you need the carrier and you've got to get Israel ready, because I think the mullahs will fire off everything they can if they come under attack. And you might want to. The term W used in the Oval Office with me once and a bunch of other talk show hosts was, we can disintermediate a lot of money. Isn't that a big word? Disintermediate? It was a funny thing, but we could take their money.
- [80:09]
Jim Garrity
I've never seen you do Bush before.
- [80:11]
Hugh Hewitt
W. That was a memorable. Pretty big word for Debbie, huh?
- [80:16]
Jim Garrity
And I thought, we're gonna disintermediate.
- [80:18]
Hugh Hewitt
Yeah, dis.
- [80:19]
Jim Garrity
We're not just gonna mediate them. We're gonna dis them in the dis. Intermediate. They're gonna feel insulted through.
- [80:25]
Michael Knowles
Through the entire mediate.
- [80:27]
Jim Garrity
So whatever channel they're on, they're gonna feel dissed. That's what it means when we disintermediate them.
- [80:32]
Hugh Hewitt
Well, it was funny, but he was talking about things we can do that we don't see. And I'm gonna give two months for everyone to get together and figure it out. But you made a key point about the rial is still worthless. And if you were, you know, going long on the rial, you're hurt. What I want to ask you is, does what we saw this week justify or should it justify in the minds of even Barack Obama and Ben Rhodes and John Kerry, that this regime would have used the nukes if they'd been able to build them? They're crazy. They'll kill people by the thousands.
- [81:05]
Christine Rosen
Yes.
- [81:06]
Jim Garrity
And by the way, you know, why are we ever putting more money into the hands of this regulation regime. Look, the problems of the Iranian economy are not simply because of our sanctions, but our sanctions have been a factor in it. And the maximum pressure campaign that Trump has enacted since he returned to office is no doubt a factor. Wall Street Journal had a good article on this. There are real problems with corruption in the regime. There are real problems of the fact that for obvious reason, Russia can't help them out the way it used to. The Russian economy is in rough shape. But I'd also just point out, according to the Iranian everybody, Iranian elite is trying to get their money out of the country as quickly as possible. There are the reports, according to a member of British Parliament, that you have planes full of gold flying from Tehran to Moscow. Now, if you're an Iranian elite, you only do this if you think there's a real chance that a month from now, two months from now, three months from now, by the end of the year, the Iranian regime is not in place. Right. You owe you shipping tons of gold out of the country. You don't do that on a whim. So the people who are presumably in the best position to know the condition of the Iranian regime are acting really nervous right now. That's why I think this is not just the same old show we've seen of protesters before. I think they really are hanging on by the edge of their fingernails.
- [82:19]
Alex Gray
Right.
- [82:19]
Hugh Hewitt
It's also why I don't think it's over. Jim Garrity at National Review, thank you. Follow him at on X at Jim garrity. Listen to 3 Martini Lunch. Listen to the editor 3D, his column in the Washington Post and come right back to the Hugh Hewitt Show. A little bit pinched. Well, if you make a switch to consumer cellular, you may add some stretch to your budget. Consumer cellular.com hugh 1-800-411-4454 now listen, do not fall for the phone on us big wireless offer. That phone is not free. Typically, the most expensive phone you ever buy is the free phone that you get with Big Cellular. Look at the actual customer cost of that plan, the length of the contract before you get locked into what could be a thousand dollar mistake. Right now, for a limited time only, you get the second month of service with Consumer Cellular for free when you use my promo code. Hugh or visit consumercellular.com Hue it'll be automatic. But if you call 1-800-411-4454 and mention Hue, you get that second month free. And here's something my list listeners who are 50 and older will love two unlimited lines of data, two for just $60. That's only $30 per line. Unlimited data. It's an easy way to manage your cost of living. It is the best deal out there called 1-800-411-4454. Be sure to use my promo code. Hugh.
- [83:44]
Noah C. Rothman
One bad tenant, one late rent cycle. That's all it takes for your year to spiral. Turbo tenant helps you prevent rental nightmares before they happen. With trusted screening, customizable leases, automated rent collection and timely maintenance tracking, you can stay ahead of every issue. Get started for free@turbotenant.com Good evening, Grace and Erica.
- [84:03]
Hugh Hewitt
Hugh Hewlett in with the Relief Factor, Studio west. So pleased to welcome back to the program Senator Shelley Moore Capito, who represents the great state of West Virginia. Senator Capito, I heard you on with my colleague Scott Jennings earlier today. I'm going to go in reverse order of the subject that you covered with Scott. I want to start you're on appropriations, chaired by Susan Collins. I think I heard you say crcr, no shutdown. I was hoping we'd actually pass all 11 appropriations bills. How many do you think are actually going to get passed and the rest go into the minibus?
- [84:38]
Senator Shelley Moore Capito
I think that we'll pass them all except for one, and that's Homeland Security. I think because of what's going on with the ICE situation. And it's always a very difficult bill because I chaired that subcommittee myself. I think with it Katie Britt's working hard day and night to try to get to a negotiated settlement there. But it's, it's looking a little grim. So I think we'll get them all. But that one, which is would be a remarkable achievement for us as appropriators, for Susan as the chair and really for the House and Senate, you know, and so I'm very pleased about that because it brings our spending down and it gets our priorities in the presidency, President's priorities more in line with our appropriations.
- [85:20]
Hugh Hewitt
Do you expect then a shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security? Because that includes a whole bunch of things beyond ICE that people won't want shut down, even if they don't like ice. And I think that's a 9010 issue, as Scott was saying, maybe 95,5 as on the gender issues that we'll get to. But does that mean a shutdown for dhs?
- [85:38]
Senator Shelley Moore Capito
No, I think what will happen here, Hugh, is I think we'll the last five bills will come through because the House is, is in next week. We are not they're going to pass the, the bills, if they get a Homeland Security bill, we'll pass it through here. If not, what I envision is we'll have five bills with a continuing resolution just for Homeland Security. So there would be no shutdown. Because you're right, Homeland Security is, it's tsa, it's fema, it's Coast Guard, it's Secret Service. There's a lot in there that Essential sources Services.
- [86:11]
Hugh Hewitt
All right. Now, Senator, I had President Trump on a week ago. He said he wants a trillion and a half dollars next year for the Department of war. That's 600 billion more, roughly 600 billion more than you passed this year. What do you make of that?
- [86:29]
Senator Shelley Moore Capito
Well, that's a steep hill. I think that as we're now trying to shrink these bills but still keep the vibrant department, you know, Defense, the Defense authorizations and the appropriate creations robust, when we see what's going on around the world, another 600 billion is going to be very, very difficult. It's either going to be major cuts in other areas or we're going to again be overspending. And so I think there probably a compromise. I would love to see more money to the Department of War, but I'm not sure. I don't think we have the bandwidth to go that high. I really don't. And so we'll have to see what happens as we move through the year.
- [87:07]
Hugh Hewitt
Now, Senator, you also made a funny comment. I laughed in the car when you said Scott brought up Iran. He said, well, Scott, this is really my generation. I laughed. You got out of Duke about the time I got out of Harvard and about the time that the mullahs came back from France and took over Iran and exiled the Shah and took our embassy. So it's imprinted on our generation. Right. We'd love that regime to go. I think the president's going to wait until the Lincoln carrier group is close enough to provide air cover to Israel in the event the mullahs fire ballistic back. What's your sense of the situation?
- [87:40]
Senator Shelley Moore Capito
Well, I mean, I think it's remarkable to see we've seen from time to time Iran, you know, and uprisings and, and then calm back down. This seems to me to be a lot more. And you know, I can't help but think that is there a tie here with Maduro out of the picture, one of Iran's big proponents? Is there a tie here, a crumbling of and weakening of some of these rogue nations like IR or Cuba? Obviously we've already seen that in Venezuela. So I would like to think that there's a grand plan here. I'm not sure there is. So what I think is because they've cut the Internet, because they've tried to shelter what's actually happening in that country from the world, tells me it's a lot worse than what it really is. And, you know, when the general public becomes an uprising, it gets to a tipping point. Point where all of a sudden it's tipping in their favor. And I think we're very close to that. So I think if I was in the neighborhood, this is going to be pivotal for them. They're funding Hezbollah, Hamas, all the terrorist groups all around, probably in Yemen, too. And. And so I think I'd like to see them step up and help. Help Iran tip to the. To the freedom. But I don't see our involvement being anything at the present time, and certainly not boots on the ground in the end.
- [89:06]
Hugh Hewitt
Now, last question before I move to the Supreme Court cases. I sort of see Iran as ruthless, beyond ruthless, like Stalin ruthless and Mao ruthless. They've mowed down at least 5,000 people, maybe double that number. They've put that number of people in prison. That's in one week. So I just want to go back to Operation Midnight Hammer. I'm very glad the president blew up their nuclear program because I think these people would threaten and would use. Use nuclear weapons against Israel. Have you factored that in yet, to your assessment of Midnight Hammer?
- [89:41]
Senator Shelley Moore Capito
I have bought it. Yes, I have. And I think it absolutely was a very precise mission that achieved the desired results. I had to kind of laugh because remember Baghdad Bob from Iraq? He kept saying everything's great and his country is folding around him. Well, they had one of the defense ministers or something on from Iran, and he said, well, if the US Gets into this, it's going to be another failed thing like they did in June. I'm like, you mean when we took your nuclear facilities out successfully? So, I mean, they don't even have a shred of truth in any of this. And so I do think by defanging that the moral structure there is so much different that they could justify, in the name of a radical religion, wiping out the free world with their nuclear capabilities. And thank goodness they're not going to be able to do that.
- [90:29]
Hugh Hewitt
Yeah, I think you're referring to. Referring to Bret Baier's interview with the foreign minister last night. It was a Baghdad Bob moment. He blamed the Jews. In the end, he said the Jews were killing the protesters in Tehran. And it was so insane. But we gotta Get a carrier group there, because if they fire off all those ballistic missiles, we help Israel prevent the worst. Now let's turn to Title ix, Senator, because West Virginia and Idaho both passed statutes that are pretty simply put, boys may not play and girls sports. We have three boys, girls and people who are confused. And about those people, we want to have compassion and care, but we also want to protect girls sports and spaces. And I don't think it's going to be close. On the Supreme Court, I listened to a lot of the argument they might get Justice Brown Jackson on some critical legal theory out there from a different legal planet than I've been on for a long time. I think you're going to win in the state of West Virginia. Walking away, what was your sense after the argument?
- [91:27]
Senator Shelley Moore Capito
I definitely think that we will win. I mean, it's just a common sense fairness issue in my view. I mean, here again, I'm dating myself. But, you know, I remember when Title IX came into, into being, I was actually playing a sport at college at the time. And the differences that that Title IX made in women's sports just in the very beginning was amazing to watch. And so now it's even more and more. And I think we've encouraged our girls, we've encouraged women's sports. There are all kind of benefits to sports that we don't even talk about besides winning and losing and physical prowess. And so but if, if you're, if you're going to throw a kinker in here and have unfair competition, it depresses the team, the sport, and, and the ability to participate. Honestly, I'm with you. I have compassion for people that are in this, in this category, like the young lady in West Virginia, but at the same time time she's made a choice. And the choice is if you make this choice, you're not going to be permitted to play in girls sports. I mean, that's, that's a logical choice. We make choices every day, and that's a choice that she's made. And so, you know, we'll see. I think, I think it's going to be overwhelming. I didn't see, I didn't hear any argument that was compelling at all. Especially when you said Alita's like, can you define a girl? And they're like, well, we didn't really look into that. Well, then how am I going to tell you, you what girls can play in girls sports if you don't tell me what a girl is?
- [92:55]
Hugh Hewitt
Yeah. And Justice Alito had me laughing. Don't get an argument with him or Justice Thomas because he said, okay, you know, Title IX is supposed to protect girls sports. If we can't define girl, how are we supposed to protect girl sports? And the poor ACLU lawyer was absolutely speechless because it is a 95. 5 issue. So Senator Scott went global on you. I'm going to go global on you. I think the Democratic Party has lost the theme. I think they've gone off the left edge because of their activist base and they've lost touch on so many things and they're deranged by President Trump. They really he's got on their brain, as your former colleague, now Vice President Vance has. Do any of them come up to you in the Senate and say, I don't know what happened to the party I started with 20 years ago, because this is not the Democratic Party of our youth with Scoop Jackson and Democrats like that. Got a minute, Senator?
- [93:48]
Senator Shelley Moore Capito
Well, you know, I look at my own state that was totally run by the Democrats for 80 years, and guess what? There's not a, there's not a single office holder now there, except maybe seven in the state legislature. It is a different party. You know, they don't seem to be as bothered about it as I would be, I guess because they can still win in pockets of this country that would give them significant representation. You know, when they went in Georgia, that's that's a problem. They may not hopefully they won't win again there. But, you know, they are appealing to every parts of their party and even though it's shrinking, I think they think that they're on the high ground.
- [94:24]
Hugh Hewitt
Well, my hat is off to you, Chairwoman Collins. Everyone on approach for getting the work done and West Virginia for leading the way with Idaho on common sense legislation on girls and boys sports. And we agree on Iran. Always good to talk to you, Senator. Thank you for appearing on the HUGH I'll be right back. America. Stay tuned.