Did This Democrat Congresswoman Admit to TREASON?

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Josh Hammer Show

Episode: Did This Democrat Congresswoman Admit to TREASON?
Date: May 7, 2026
Host: Josh Hammer

---

Episode Overview

In this episode, Josh Hammer, Newsweek Senior Editor-at-Large and prominent conservative commentator, leads with a provocative question: Did Democrat Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal come dangerously close to—or actually admit to—treason in her public comments about helping Cuba circumvent U.S. sanctions? The conversation branches into broader issues of American foreign policy (especially toward Cuba and Iran), American national identity, voting rights, and reflections on patriotism, featuring segments with legal and geopolitical analysis, notable political voices, and cultural commentary.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Gravity of Treason and Context of the Allegation (00:29–05:13)

• Treason as a Serious Charge:
  Josh Hammer explains the historic and legal gravity of the accusation:

  “In all of American law, there is no graver charge than that of treason.” (00:29)

• Cuban-American Relations & Venezuela:
  Context is set around recent US military operations in Latin America, ongoing Cuban support for hostile regimes, and the Trump administration's recent escalation of sanctions against Cuba.

• Rubio as Secretary of State:
  Marco Rubio, with his Cuban heritage, is highlighted as a key player in the administration’s hardline stance toward Cuba.

---

2. Pramila Jayapal’s Statement & Its Implications (05:13–08:48)

• Jayapal’s Admission (audio replayed):

  “I was in conversations with the ambassadors from Mexico and some other places... trying to figure out how to get oil there. But it is a crisis beyond imagination. Just this past Friday, on May 1, Trump signed a broad executive order that widens sanctions and allows for new penalties...” – Pramila Jayapal (05:13)

• Hammer’s Reaction:
  Josh is “flabbergasted,” arguing that a sitting Congresswoman is candidly talking to foreign governments about ways to help Cuba circumvent U.S. sanctions, which he sees as skirting dangerously close to treason.

• Legal Definition of Treason:
  Hammer references 18 U.S. Code §2381 and quotes the relevant clause:

  “Whoever...adheres to [the United States’] enemies, giving them aid and comfort... is guilty of treason.” (08:28)

  He asserts,

  “She’s clearly giving [Cuba] aid and comfort. Is she adhering to the enemy? ... It's shockingly close there.” (08:48)

• Political and Constitutional Considerations:
  Hammer notes that Jayapal’s statements are not protected under the "speech or debate" clause since they were not on the House floor.

• Call for DOJ Action:

  “At a bare, bare minimum, the DOJ under Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche absolutely needs to investigate this. Abso freaking lutely...” (08:50)

---

3. The Iran Situation – Interview with Rebecca Heinrichs (13:31–18:34)

• Iranian Conflict & Negotiations:
  Analysis of U.S. operations against Iran and the status of peace negotiations post-Epic Fury and Project Freedom.

• Rebecca Heinrichs’ Assessment:
  Heinrichs, from the Hudson Institute, highlights ongoing U.S. military presence, the odd pause of Project Freedom, and confusion over the Trump administration's strategic goals.

  “The one thing that I find still the most perplexing was the pause of Project Freedom... By President Trump. And it seems as though it was because there was a deal sort of at hand…” – Rebecca Heinrichs (14:40)

• Success Metrics for U.S. Policy:
  Hammer lays out four criteria for any acceptable Iran deal:

  1. Iran must halt uranium enrichment and turn over its stockpile.
  2. Ballistic missiles and drones must be removed or severely limited.
  3. Iran must cease funding terror proxies (Hezbollah, Houthis, Hamas, etc.).
  4. Transparency and verification on all points.

---

4. American National Identity: Debating the “Creedal Nation” (24:10–30:32)

• Neil Gorsuch’s Reflections:
  Justice Gorsuch speaks about American ideals and historical sacrifice:

  “And many of them gave their fortunes to the revolution and died poor as a result of it. … We're a creedal nation. What unites us is … a belief in those three ideals. That's our mission statement as a country.” – Neil Gorsuch (24:10)

• Hammer’s Critique:
  Josh disagrees with the idea that America is solely a creedal nation:

  “There is a notion here of a baseline cultural Protestantism, of the so-called Protestant work ethic… I am obviously not saying that everyone has to be a Protestant... There is something inherently beneficial about the cultural Protestantism that founded America.” (25:26–28:45)

• Marco Rubio’s Vision:
  Rubio’s remarks on American exceptionalism and the nation’s continuous improvement:

  “We want it to continue to be the place where anyone from anywhere can achieve anything, … It's still better than anybody else's history. And ours is a story of perpetual improvement.” – Marco Rubio (29:39)

• Political Ascendance:
  Hammer notes Rubio’s rising prominence and potential for a 2028 presidential run.

---

5. Voting Rights, Race, and "Anti-Racism” in Congressional Redistricting (33:04–36:54)

• Redistricting Battles in the South:
  Hammer mocks Democrat claims that redrawing maps to comply with anti-race-based redistricting is “racist,” noting the irony that Tennessee’s only Democrat seat (representing a majority-minority district) is held by a white Jewish congressman, Steve Cohen.

• Hammer’s Commentary:

  “So it’s just delectable, isn’t it? ...Hakeem Jeffries ... is tweeting ... about black representation by getting rid of Steve Cohen. Yes. Noted black man Steve Cohen ... Steve Cohen ain’t black. OK?” (33:47)

• Clarence Thomas Reference:
  Hammer draws on Clarence Thomas’s skepticism that only black representatives can serve black-majority districts:

  "The notion that black people need fellow black people to elect black people is itself a form of racism… It’s not actually about whites or blacks. It’s about Democrats or Republicans. That’s all they care about.” (33:49–34:16)

---

6. Los Angeles Politics: Non-Citizen Voting Debate (36:11–37:48)

• LA Mayoral Debate Clip:
  Mayor Karen Bass hedges on whether non-citizens should be allowed to vote, saying:

  “It depends. It’s not a yes or no... when you say noncitizens, it doesn’t mean they’re here illegally... There’s a lot of states and cities that do that on very, very local elections...” (36:26)

• Hammer’s Response:

  “Should non-citizens vote? No. No… The ‘we the people’ language of the Constitution does not refer to people here illegally ... even [those] here legally…” (37:08)

• Hammer’s Critique of LA Governance:
  Harsh criticism of Karen Bass and city conditions (“feces, needles, homeless people…”), celebrating federal drug busts as filling the void left by local authorities.

---

7. National Prayer Day & American Heritage (40:04–40:40)

• Mike Johnson’s Remarks:
  Speaker of the House Mike Johnson reflects:

  “Prayer has been a part of our DNA since the very beginning... We are a praying nation. We always have been. It truly is part of who we are.” (40:04)

• Hammer’s Reflection:
  Mentions George W. Bush’s and George Washington’s traditions of prayer as foundational for American identity.

---

Notable Quotes and Memorable Moments

• “I'm not sure this actually is treason because treason is just so, so, so big... Is there any higher charge than treason? I'm really not sure that there is.” – Josh Hammer (00:29)

• “She’s clearly giving them aid and comfort.” – Josh Hammer (08:48)

• “Abso freaking lutely [the DOJ] should investigate this.” – Josh Hammer (08:50)

• “We forget that the Revolution was eight bloody long years... And many of them gave their fortunes to the revolution and died poor as a result of it.” – Neil Gorsuch (24:10)

• “There’s something inherently beneficial about the cultural Protestantism that founded America....” – Josh Hammer (27:40)

• “It has the look and feel, doesn’t it, of a presidential tryout. Rubio ... is really, really soaring in basically everyone’s eyes.” – Josh Hammer (30:32)

• “Should non-citizens vote? No. No... Consent of the governed depends on there being a citizenry, not just the unvarnished masses.” – Josh Hammer (37:08)

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

| Segment | Timestamp | |-----------------------------------------------|-------------| | Treason discussion intro | 00:29 | | Jayapal’s Cuba comments (clip) | 05:13 | | Hammer’s legal analysis of treason | 08:48 | | Interview: Rebecca Heinrichs on Iran | 13:31 | | Neil Gorsuch on American creed | 24:10 | | Hammer’s critique of “creedal nation” | 25:26 | | Marco Rubio’s comments on American identity | 29:39 | | Voting rights, redistricting & race | 33:04 | | Karen Bass: Non-citizen voting debate | 36:26 | | Mike Johnson: National Prayer Day | 40:04 |

---

Takeaways for Listeners

• Hammer uses Jayapal’s remarks to examine the boundaries of legal versus moral treason and calls for a DOJ investigation.
• The conversation transitions to U.S. assertiveness abroad (esp. Iran), laying out practical success metrics.
• American identity is debated: creed alone vs. creed and culture.
• Hammer skewers what he views as progressive overreach on voting rights and LA’s governance, using notable contemporary examples.
• The episode closes with patriotic reflection on the role of faith and prayer in American life.

---

Summary prepared for listeners who want a comprehensive, engaging breakdown of this episode’s arguments, legal and political analysis, and memorable quotes.

Transcript

[Commercial Announcer]

Save on family essentials at Safeway and Albertsons this week at Safeway and Albertsons, fresh cut cantaloupe, watermelon, pineapple or Melon Medley Bowls 24 ounces are $5 each and Wild Caught Lobster Tails are $4.99 each. Limit eight member price plus selected sizes and varieties of Doritos, Lays, Cheetos, Sun Chips and Kettle cook chips are $1.99 each. Limit four member price. Hurry in. These deals won't last. Visit safewayoralbertsons.com for more deals and ways

[Josh Hammer]

to save in all of American law, there is no graver charge than that of treason. Has a sitting Democrat congresswoman possibly committed treason? Well, the answer actually might be a lot closer than you think. I'm Josh Hammer and this is the Josh Hammer Show. Treason is a word that I do not typically like to toss around. Just a few months ago there was the infamous video from the so called Seditious Six, this group of elected Democrats led by people like Mark Kelly out in Arizona talking about how if you are in the military you have an obligation to defy the chain of command and to defy allegedly illegal orders. How convenient that they never actually defined what actually constitutes an illegal order. And at the time, what we said here on the show is that this is absolutely appalling and egregious behav. It is absolutely subversive. It is absolutely beyond the pale for these opposition party elected members of the Congress to try to tell members of the military of the armed forces how they can act when it comes to following the chain of command up to and including the President who is the commander in chief. Beyond. But I also said at the time that I'm not sure this actually is treason because treason is just so, so, so big treason, literally high treason. Going back to England and even before that the entire history of Western law. Is there any higher charge than treason? I'm really not sure that there is. So the context for this conversation here before we dive in and has to do with Cuba. Cuba has for months been on our radar, at least since Operation Absolute Resolve back in Caracas in Venezuela in January, the staggering successful operation by which Delta Force, US army forces and others swooped in to get and to extract Nicolas Maduro from his Hezbollah Cuban guarded compound there in the Venezuelan capital. And then they brought him to New York to extradite him into face justice for what has previously been an indictment because he was technically actually just a fugitive from justice. After that, there's been a lot of speculation as to whether or not Cuba, which was the main supporter of the Hugo Chavez, Nicolas Maduro regime in Venezuela. Could Cuba be the next shoe to drop? And we currently have a secret secretary of state who we'll talk about a little bit later on today's show, by the way, Marco Rubio, who is himself of Cuban heritage and who has really strong thoughts on the question of Cuba. And at various times, both President Trump and Secretary Rubio have said in not so subtle language that Cuba actually could be the next shoe to drop. They've said that actually as recently as just this past week now, Trump has put in numerous sanctions in place when it comes to Cuba. Cuba, which continues to be ruled by the revolutionary Castro regime, which came into power six and a half at this point, gosh, nearly seven decades ago. And it's been a massive, massive thorn in the side of the United States and our interests literally since the day that it founded. So there have been a series of executive orders, a series of sanctions implemented by the Trump administration. Most recently, actually, there were a brand new suite of sanctions on Cuba that Trump just signed via executive order literally six days ago. This actually happened just last Friday, Trump signing an executive order that broadens, quote, the existing sanctions on Cuba to include new restrictions under the International National Emergency Economic Powers act, new sanctions on entities, persons or affiliates that support the Cuban regime's security apparatus, complicit in corruption, human rights violations, etc. So the Trump administration, long story short, is going hard, going really hard on Cuba. And there is this thought process that Cuba could indeed be the next shoe to drop when it comes to Venezuela, possibly Iran. More on that on today's show as well. By the way, could after the Iran operation, could Cuba be next? Well, well, that is the context for our conversation about treason. So I was just utterly flabbergasted on Wednesday to see this clip float around from Pramila Jayapal. Pramila Jayapal is from Washington State. She has been one of the leaders of the House Democratic Caucus's progressive wing for years and years and years. She presents herself as a slightly more senior statesman than an Alexandria Ocasio Cortez or an Ilhan Omar or Rashid Tille. But she has basically all the same values. She is as far left as they come. And now it turns out when it comes to Cuba, she is sounding, dare I say, close to treasonous. So Pramila Jayapal saying just this week, quote, I was in conversations with the ambassadors from Mexico and some other places, other countries in Latin America, trying to figure out how to get oil there okay, this is a big deal. And just so you make sure that I'm not making it up, here again is Peramila J. Pal. Let's go ahead and play this clip.

[Pramila Jayapal]

I was in conversations with the ambassadors from Mexico and some other places and I know other countries in Latin America trying to figure out how to get oil there. But it is a crisis beyond imagination. Just this past Friday, on May 1, Trump signed a broad executive order that widens sanctions and allows for new penalties similar to what we have for Iran and Russia against foreign banks and firms that are dealing with Cuba. And it also reinforces the ban on U.S. tourism.

[Josh Hammer]

Okay, so she is admitting that she is talking with foreign countries about how to get sanctioned oil to the sanctioned country. And just so we're clear about what Cuba is, Cuba is one of precisely four countries that is on the US State Department's State Sponsors of Terrorism list. Literally. Go to state.gov you will see it. It's a very short list, I assure you. There are precisely four countries. There is Cuba, there is North Korea, Iran and Syria. That's literally it. There are four countries there. And Syria actually is possibly in the process of getting off that list because of their change in regime. Whether they should be is another story there. But Cuba was actually put on in the first Trump term towards the very end, January 12, 2021. So Cuba is a state sponsor of terrorism and you have a sitting member of Congress who is now talking about trying to get sanctioned oil to this state's bond of terrorism in direct contravention of the policy of the executive branch. And the President of course is the organ of foreign policy, which we know from the Constitution, which we know from common sense as confirmed and affirmed over the decades, over the years. So is this actually treason? Well, I've got some thoughts on that one. But for now just a quick word from our sponsor folks. Our sponsor for today's show is Balance of Nature. You know, look, I try to eat a healthy diet. I go on keto actually. Sometimes I intermittent fast, sometimes there I try to do what I can. I eat a lot of fruits and veggies. But look, we are all super, super busy people. It's not always easy to get your well rounded meal. That's why I take Balance of Nature supplements. It supports a lifestyle of eating whole foods and being nutritious. All the products at Balance of Nature are lab tested. There are no binders, there are no fillers, there are no flow agents at all. They use a custom process where whole foods are dried using this tailored vacuum, cold process. Then they are powdered and packaged, put into a very convenient package that you can take home with you. Trust me folks, I've been using this recently and I feel like a million bucks. The whole health system there gives you 47 ingredients of fruits, vegetables, spices and fibers. It is a complement, not a substitute, a compliment to your well rounded diet. But go ahead and go to balanceofnature.com and check out their whole health system today you can actually use discount code Hammer H A M M E R to get a 10% additional discount. Go to balanceofnature.com today. Our sponsor today is Balance of Nature. So is this actually treason? Well now here's what I will say. It's really, really close. Treason is actually codified of US law. It is 18 US code section 2381. The founders were intimately familiar with treason. It goes way back to the English common law and frankly way before that. It's still codified today as it is codified in American law today. Here's what it says. Quote Whoever owing allegiance to the United States levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere is guilty of treason. So if you want to be close readers here, the relevant language is adheres adheres to the enemies of the United States, giving them aid and comfort. So she's clearly giving them aid and comfort.

[Commentator/Analyst]

Is she adhering to the enemy?

[Josh Hammer]

Well, you can make a lawyerly argument. I'm not necessarily saying that a sitting member of Congress has committed high treason and should be put to death, which actually is the literal prescribed punishment for treason. To be clear, I am not calling for that. What I'm saying is, is that this is so shockingly irresponsible behavior and rhetoric that at a bare, bare minimum, the DOJ under the Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche absolutely needs to investigate this. Abso freaking lutely should investigate this. This is shockingly, shockingly close there. And let her defend it. Let her try to defend her own comments there. Again, the relevant language here is is she actually adhering to the enemies? Again, the enemy in this case is a literal state sponsor of terrorism. This is really, really, really, really shocking stuff. By the way, in case you had the thought, the speech or debate clause, which is another clause in the Constitution, does not protect this statement. So the speech or debate clause is an Article 1, Section 6 of the Constitution basically immunizes lawmakers from what they say on the floor of the center of the House. But she's not saying this on the floor. She's saying it off to the side. Okay. This is not immunized conduct there. It is shockingly close to treasonous rhetoric in my judgment. It arguably is over the line there and at a minimum, it ought to be investigated. I hope that that indeed happen. Well, we're gonna be joined fairly soon by Rekha Heinrichs of the Huss Institute for a conversation about what the heck is happening when it comes to Iran and the Middle East. Donald Trump actually speaking of things that are happening in Washington, Donald Trump was asked about what is happening in Iran there. And the latest, Trump saying that it is very possible that we will make a deal with the Iranian regime here. Was Donald Trump speaking about that?

[Interviewer]

You're facing an opponent right now in Iran that has refused to submit. You seem optimistic now that you may be closer to a deal. What's different about this moment than in other moments where a deal has seemed close?

[Donald Trump]

Well, why do you say they refuse to submit? You don't know that. You don't know what's going on.

[Interviewer]

Fired on US Ships a few days ago.

[Donald Trump]

Yeah, a few days ago is a long time ago. You know, in the world of war. A few days ago. No, they want to make a deal badly. And we'll see if we get there. If we get there. They can't have nuclear weapons. You know, it's very simple. But what's not to submit? So they had a Navy with 159 ships and now every ship is blown to pieces and lying at the bottom of the water. They had an air force, lots of planes, and they don't have any planes. They don't have any anti aircraft, they don't have any radar left. Their missiles are mostly decimated. They have some. They have probably 18, 19%, but not a lot by comparison to what they had. And their leaders are all dead. So I think we won. Now it's only a question of, look, if we left right now Iran, it would take them 20 years to rebuild. You would call that we're in good shape, right? Fantastic. We're in good shape and now we're doing well. Now we have to get what we have to get. If we don't do that, we'll have to go a big step further. But with that being said, they want to make a deal. We've had very good talks over the last 24 hours and it's very possible that we'll make a deal.

[Josh Hammer]

Well, have we won? As we said here on the show this week, yes. But also no.

[Commentator/Analyst]

We are clearly winning.

[Josh Hammer]

We have done tremendous damage to Iran through Epic fury. Have we won? That depends on what the goals of the operation are. To this day, I'm not entirely sure that we have fully accomplished all that we set out to accomplish. However. However, there is the possibility based on what is currently floating around that if there is a deal and there's a lot of rumors as to what it will consist of, there is allegedly a one page memorandum of understanding, a one page MOU that the Iranians are currently considering from the American negotiators, namely Steve Wyckoff, Jared Kushner and so forth there that could touch the enriched uranium. That would be a big win.

[Commentator/Analyst]

But is it enough?

[Josh Hammer]

Is it enough at this point if this deal emerges to basically say we're done here, we won and we can go home? It's a very complicated question, but our next guest, Rebecca Heinrichs, is going to be an astute analyst, I'm quite confident to try to give us some answers to the very question. Folks, we'll be right back after a short break with Rebecca Heinrich. Stay with us.

[Spin Quest Advertiser]

Forget whatever plans you have this weekend because you're staying at home and playing on Spin Quest and there's never been a better time to sign up than right now. New users get 30 coin packs for just $10. All the table games you love with hundreds of slot games and real cash Prizes. That's at spinquest.com S P I N Q U-E-S-T.com Spinquest is a free to

[Josh Hammer]

play social casino void where prohibited.

[Commercial Announcer]

Visit spinquest.com for more details.

[Josh Hammer]

Welcome back. So if you are a regular listener or viewer of the program, you likely by now are familiar with one of our good friends, Rebecca Heinrich. Rebecca Heinrich is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, an all around sharp and clear eyed thinker when it comes to all matters geopolitical. You can follow Rebecca on xlheinrich and she joins us now. Rebecca, welcome back to the program, my friend. I want to bring you on to hopefully try to clarify a situation that is somewhat inscrutable. And I think that I frankly don't know what's going on. Perhaps you can help me make sense of it. And I speak of course about the situation in Iran, which is kind of fluctuating on a day by day basis. Earlier this week, President Trump and Secretary of State Rubio saying that Project Freedom has essentially replaced Operation Epic Fury. And then within 24 to 48 hours, Project Freedom was abruptly called off. It looks like there might be a deal in the works as a one page memorandum of understanding that's being rumored floating around there. On the other hand, I saw a report just this morning that the United States fired on an Iranian oil tanker that was trying to get out of the American naval blockade. So there's just a lot of chaos. So I kind of just toss it to you. What the heck is going on when it comes to Iran right now.

[Rebecca Heinrichs]

Okay, thanks. Well, it's good to be back with you, Josh. So I think a few things to kind of sift through. One, of course, your viewers followers will know that the American military power, of course, is still in the region. Trump has not removed any of it. So we saw that one aircraft carrier, Ford, finally taking some reprieve, but it was replaced by another aircraft carrier. So we have two aircraft carriers in the region, and then we have a significant number of Marines that were deployed there. Even before that, we started engaging in this diplomatic effort. So a lot of military power and a lot of economic squeeze. The blockade is still in place, as you say. The one thing that I find still the most perplexing was the pause of Project Freedom, because if you remember what Secretary Rubio and Hegseth were saying about Project Freedom is that it's separate from Epic Fury in that it's not an offensive military operation engaging in hostilities towards Iran. This was purely defensive. It was humanitarian in nature because there's 1,500 ships essentially being held hostage by the IRGC stuck in the strait, thousands and thousands of sailors with a lot of oil on those tankers. And so Project Freedom was meant for the United States to lead the way, to essentially point through this corridor that hugs along Oman. That's safe. We've cleared some mines to get those ships sailing. It was suddenly quit, stopped, paused, as you said, by President Trump. And it seems as though it was because there was a deal sort of at hand that the Pakistanis believed Project Freedom would threaten this deal. And even if that's true, I would suggest that it would be a bad deal.

[Josh Hammer]

Then we seem to have lost Rebecca, left to get her back soon, but she's talking about how the deal that is merging could potentially be amenable to America first, to those of us who identify as America first, to those of us who identify as strong MAGA supporters in general. It also could potentially not be amenable to our interests and above all, frankly, to the national interests of the United States, which is really all, literally all that we ought to care about. There is nothing else that matters when it comes to what the United States does when it comes to Iran. The Only question is, will the results of all of this epic fury, Project Freedom, economic fury, whatever the heck is going on now, this ceasefire, that's not really a ceasefire. Will the results of all this ultimately redound in earnest to the American national interests? And again, it is very clear, it is very clear, as we were just discussing, that a tremendous amount has already been accomplished. A tremendous amount.

[Commentator/Analyst]

Right now in May, Iran is a notably, a notably less threat, less of

[Josh Hammer]

a threat to the world and to the United States above all, because that's what we care about than they were prior to the commencement of operations back on February 28th. Their navy is basically non existent. Their air force is now basically non existent. Their missile and drone sites have taken a real schlacking. They still exist, but they've been absolutely pounded. The nuclear facilities, Fatans, Ishvahan for Dao, many of them were bombed pretty heavily during Operation Midnight Hammer, the B2 bombing run last June. And they've been pounded yet again over the course of the past two months. Their leadership all the way up to and including ali Khamenei, the 37 year ruling tyrant, he is no more.

[Commentator/Analyst]

They've been beaten really, really, really quite badly.

[Josh Hammer]

So if this were to end today, the world would be a much safer place. The United States would definitely, definitely, definitely be better off. No doubt about that. Anyone who's trying to convince you the alternative. There are a lot of folks out there, folks, a lot of folks who

[Commentator/Analyst]

are saying, oh, America's lost the war in Iran.

[Josh Hammer]

Oh really?

[Commentator/Analyst]

No, we haven't.

[Josh Hammer]

They say America is going to lose.

[Commentator/Analyst]

Well, no, we're not, because already we've achieved a lot.

[Josh Hammer]

That is a separate question though, that I think, the more interesting one and the more urgent one, which is whether or not we have achieved success on our own terms. We clearly have not lost the war. Have we achieved full, unambiguous success on our own terms? That I think is a little more of a complicated question and frankly, we actually have no idea what the answer is. We do not know because we just have no idea how it's going to play out. I have no idea. You have no idea? Frankly, I don't think the President or anyone else knows because partially it's out of their control. It depends partially on these absolute lunatics, including Ahmed Vahidi, who's the head of the irgc, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the terrorist wing of the Iranian regime. Depends on what they do. We have four criteria, our big four criteria as to what any deal must constitute and those four criteria in case you haven't been listening, when we've explained in the past, those four criteria are the following. First and foremost, Iran must stop, stop, stop enriching uranium and turn over all of its enriched uranium. That is the first and most indispensable requirement of what any deal must require. Second, you must see the complete removal of their ballistic missiles and drones. I don't really know how that happens in practice, to be honest with you, because these are large items. But surely it can be done at a bare, bare minimum, puts severe, severe limitations and how they can transport and ultimately use those weapons in offensive fashion across the region, ultimately up to and including the European continent, which we now know is at risk, because those missiles can apparently go at least as far as 2 1/2 thousand miles from where they are launched. Third, Iran must stop its financing of its terror proxies all across the region. Hezbollah, the Houthis, Hamas, all of the others. You know them by now. That has to stop as well. And then finally, these three or four moves must be made open. Seemingly, that was the goal of Project Freedom before it was abruptly called off. But those are the four goals. Any deal, any memorandum of understanding that's currently being negotiated must include those four items. And we can let the Chinese call the shots in advance of President Trump's trip to Beijing to meet with Xi Jinping next. Next week, China's going to want to see a deal. They're going to want to flex their muscles. If we get a deal before then, it better be a darn good deal. It better be a deal that meets all those criteria, because if not, it will be a major victory for China, for its Iranian ally. And it will not be a failure, but it will be a less than full success on the complete terms of the American national interest. Folks, a quick commercial break. We'll be right back with more after this. Welcome back. So there's so much else to get to, and I don't want to spend too much longer on the topic of Iran. But for now, allow me to just say this. Let's recall what a deal is and what it is not. There's a lot of confusion over this and there's a lot of confusion, especially when it comes to the debate over means and ends.

[Commentator/Analyst]

A deal is a means, it is instrumentality. A deal is not an end unto itself.

[Josh Hammer]

This is a cardinal rule of geopolitics, diplomacy and foreign policy. You don't pursue a deal for the sake of a deal. If a deal is the most convenient way, if it is the most effective way, the most efficacious way, the best way to minimize costs and to maximize benefits to achieve your goal, then you should make a deal. But there are some other means, there are sometimes some other instrumentalities that are necessary to achieve your goals. Again, all this depends on laying out your goals and being precise. One thing that frankly, I don't think the administration has done a super banged up job of since day one, Hegseth has gotten very close to it, but we haven't necessarily gotten a firm, concrete list of exactly what we set out to do to this day. That's why I've tried my best to describe what those goals are. And you just heard them there with Rebecca Heinrich. Those four goals we've been pounding here on the show for some weeks now. We'll see what this deal consists of if it happens. But unless and until those four items are included there, again, I'm not sure, frankly, that this operation is fully, fully, fully yet done on its own terms. So again, so much else to get to that I want to really move on. So just as Neil Gorsuch actually is in the news, and this is fascinating to me because Gorsuch has written two full length books in recent ish years. He had one, I believe in 2019 and then one a couple years ago in 2024. He actually has a brand new children's book out now. It's an America 250 style book. It's called Heroes of 1776 the Story of the Declaration of Independence. And this is relevant because, because of this new children's book, Neil Gorsuch has been making the rounds. Now we talk about the Supreme Court a lot on this show. Neil Gorsuch is typically referred to as the third most conservative justice on the court after, let's call them the big two of Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito. And he is the most likely to join those two very conservative originals. Justice when there is a close call. However, Gorsuch is also a real libertarian and sometimes this libertarianism really, really, really comes out. And he's given a bunch of interviews because of his children's book of dialysis. He's making all the media rounds there. And he had this one interview where he was talking about how America is a creedal nation. Let's go ahead and play this clip.

[Neil Gorsuch]

If you're gonna get interested in the Stamp act, right? And if you're gonna get interested in the Articles of Confederation, it might be because of the people behind them. And the 56 signers were incredibly, incredibly interesting people and their stories are moving. We forget that the Revolution was eight bloody long years. A third of the signers had their homes destroyed. Many of them were imprisoned. Some of their wives were imprisoned, some of their children were. Were imprisoned. And many of them gave their fortunes to the revolution and died poor as a result of it. So telling those stories of courage and sacrifice, we hope might inspire a few young minds and make them realize the Declaration's three big ideas are not inevitable. They were not inevitable, and their preservation is not inevitable. And that the torch passes to each generation. We're a creedal nation. What unites us is not a religion, it's not a race. It's a belief in those three ideals. That's our mission statement as a country.

[Josh Hammer]

So there's so much there that I wholeheartedly agree with that I'm almost hesitant to pick on the part that I really don't fully agree with, but I must, because I just really don't agree with it. And it's the latter most part here, this affirmation, this clear argument that America is a creedal nation, and that therefore, if you subscribe to our principles, if you believe in what the Declaration says, if you believe what the Constitution says, then therefore you are as American as apple pie. That is not my stance, and frankly, I think that is not the stance of anyone who really ought to think, think greatly about this question. There was a really nice post that I saw yesterday after this clip started going viral by Hugo Gordon, who is the editor in chief of the Washington examiner, the conservative leaning paper there in the D.C. area. And he says the problem with calling America a creedal nation is that the facile phrase has come to imply that we are only a creedal nation, a nation without ethnic roots. But it is not so. America's ethnic roots, as well as its creed, are English. And the country damages itself by forgetting or actively expunging that fact. As so many dogs, anyone may become an American, but to be fully, rather than merely legally American, they need to adopt the culture derived from America's English origins, which gave Americans for generations their character. So this is something I've been saying for years and years here. It was a question, frankly, that was very often on the mind of my late friend Charlie Kirk in the final year of his life. I actually literally went on Charlie's show at some point to discuss what is an American. And what really is an American, to me is something quite a bit more than simply subscribing to the creedal message of the Declaration of 1776. That is an absolute bare minimum, in legal terms, we might say that it is necessary, but it is not sufficient unto itself because you have to subscribe to something a little bit broader. And it's really what Hugo Gordon is getting at in that tweet that I just read. There is a notion here of a baseline cultural Protestantism, of the so called Protestant work ethic, of cultural, civic, Protestant norms that have been a core part of, of the American social and indeed of our political fabric really since day one. I am obviously not saying that everyone has to be a Protestant. I am an Orthodox Jew. I obviously do not believe that. What I am saying is that there is something inherently beneficial about the cultural Protestantism that found in America and that persists as at least a plurality, if not quite a majority religion or a majority shared religion in America to this day. That, I think, unfortunately, is what Justice Gorsuch is frankly missing here. Even this notion of constantly challenging authority, of not just being docile or submissive. There a lot of what Gorsuch talked about topped in the clip. His admiration for the colonists, their defiance of the stamp act of 1765, the

[Commentator/Analyst]

Boston Tea Party, all these great events

[Josh Hammer]

that happened on the road culminating to July 4, 1776 and ultimately culminating in the Treaty of Paris in 1783 that ended the war following the surrender of General Cornwallis at Yorktown two years prior. That all happened not just because of creedal notions. It happened because of this refusal to

[Commentator/Analyst]

bend the knee, of this refusal to

[Josh Hammer]

blindly submit to absolute tyranny, to absolute monarchy. It's a very Protestant notion, frankly. Again, I say this as an Orthodox Jew, I really do. So there's something a bit, a bit greater there. So the creed is necessary, but it's really not sufficient. You also have to go ahead and learn the language and fully acculture yourself to the American mind and the American ways of life. There was actually a moment earlier this week at the White House that really, really captured this. So Marco Rubio was playing Caroline Levitt for a day, basically One of the 10 million hats that Marco Rubio now wears. He's not just Secretary of State, he's not just National Security Advisor, he's not just Cuba point man. He's now also playing press secretary. And he was asked basically what America is and what it ought to be in the 20th century. And he gave a response that has already gone viral. And it's gone viral for a very good reason. Let's go ahead and play this clip.

[Marco Rubio]

My hope for America. And how do you deal with that? Yeah, look I mean, my hope for America is what it's always been. I think it's the hope I hope we all share. We want it to continue to be the place where anyone from anywhere can achieve anything, where you're not limited by the circumstances of your birth, by the color of your skin, by your ethnicity. But frankly, it's a place where you are able to overcome challenges and achieve your full potential. I think that should be the goal of every country in the world, frankly. But I think in the US we're not perfect. Our history is not one of perfection, but it's still better than anybody else's history. And ours is a story of perpetual improvement. Each generation has left the next generation of Americans freer, more prosperous, safer. And that is our goal as well. But it is a unique and exceptional country. And as we come upon this 250 year anniversary, I think we have a lot to learn and be proud of in our history. It is one of perpetual and continuous improvement, where each generation has done its part to bring us closer to fulfilling the vision that the founders of this country had upon its founding.

[Josh Hammer]

Okay, that is 10 out of 10, literally 100 out of 100,000 of 1,000, whatever you want to call it. That is basically a perfect answer. I certainly cannot do better. You probably can't do better than that either. It has the look and the feel, doesn't it, of a presidential tryout. Rubio happens to be in Rome today. He's meeting with the Pope, trying to patch up relations between United States and the Vatican. Rubio is a devout Catholic, so the guy is really, really, really soaring in basically everyone's eyes. Actually, I was checking this morning at the prediction markets. According to Kelshi, which is one of the major online prediction markets, Marco Rubio is actually now the favorite. In 2028, Marco Rubio, according to Kalestry, has a 20% chance to be the next president. J.D. vance, 18%. Gavin Newsom, 17%. So really, really fascinating stuff. Rubio clearly on the ascendant. And I think that Rubio, frankly, above all gets this notion of what it means to be an American. After all, he is the son of immigrants. But he also understands America is something greater, I believe, than just a creed. Folks, a quick commercial break, one final one. We'll be right back with more after this. Welcome back. So, as we reported previously here on the show, the fallout of the Voting Rights act case at the Supreme Court, Leslie, continues to unfold, really, all across the south, above all, because the south is the region that had these so called Majority minority districts where they tried to carve out these black majority districts in hopes of electing not just a Democrat, but ideally a black Democrat. So Tennessee and Alabama were the two states that actually were directly engaging in their state chambers yesterday to try to redraw their congressional maps. There were all sorts of protests actually in Tennessee by Democrats saying that you're trying to gut our only Democrat seat here. And that's actually quite funny, isn't it? Because there's a lot of folks saying that this is, this is racist. They always say it's racist, right? They say it's racist for Tennessee to try and come in here and to actually abide by what Supreme Court said, which that you can't discriminate the base of race when it comes to drawing maps. I mean, this is literally, this is their whole argument. They say it's racist to not be racist. Right? I mean, this is basically the Ibram X Kendi theory of race relations. Ibrahim X. Kendi years ago said that to be a good anti racist, then you must be racist against white people on behalf of black people. I mean, the mind just utterly reels. But the funniest thing about Tennessee is the following. There is, as of now, they're about to redistrict it, but as of right now, there is one Democrat majority district in all of Tennessee. The rest are Republican seats because Tennessee is a very, very red state. That seat is in the Memphis, Tennessee area in Shelby County, Tennessee. The congressman who you might know because he's been around the block a few

[Commentator/Analyst]

times is Steve Cohen, who is not

[Josh Hammer]

a black man, is he? He's a Jew, a pretty white looking Jew, much like myself, actually. He is Steve Cohen. He is the one Democrat congressman from Tennessee. So it's just delectable, isn't it? You have Hakeem Jeffries, the minority leader of the House Democrats who is tweeting, quote maga, Republicans are taking a blowtorch to black representation in the American south by getting rid of Steve Cohen. Yes. Noted black man Steve Cohen. Look, I know that we are playing fast and loose these days when it comes to how you self identify in terms of your race, your sexuality or this. That there Steve Cohen ain't black. Okay?

[Commentator/Analyst]

He's not.

[Josh Hammer]

It's a pure power grab. It is pure power. It's victimhood narrative, it's grievance politics. And it's obviously ultimately all about power. Ultimately. If you actually look at the 58 black members of Congress and there's 58 of them, a majority actually represent districts where whites Outnumber blacks. The notion is a very Clarence Thomas esque thing. I'm about to say. The notion that black people need fellow black people to elect black people is itself a form of racism. Again, most of the black members of Congress come from areas where whites outnumber blacks. It's not actually about whites or blacks. It's about Democrats or Republicans. That's all they care about. There was a. There's an article at the Bulwark which I highly do not encourage you to pay to subscribe to. But there was an article at the Bulwark yesterday talking about how some Democrat is complaining about how it could be another hundred years before a black person represents South Carolina. Let me introduce you to Senator Tim Scott. Literally one of the two senators from South Carolina is a black man. Again, these people are just so dumb. You're racist for not discriminating base of race. Unbelievable stuff. Well, equally unbelievable actually was this, this recent debate that just happened out in Los Angeles. So this week was a big week out in California. You had the California gubernatorial primary debate where you have Steve Hilton and Chad Bianco trying to get into the jungle primary as Republicans there and then a bunch of other crazies, including Katie Porter. Well, there's also the Los Angeles mayoral debate. We've briefly covered Spencer Pratt, who is this insurgent challenger trying to make it there with a lot of these extremely catchy TV ads, probably does not have a major shot, to be honest with you, as much as we all wish him well. But there was one moment that also went viral from this particular Los Angeles mayoral debate. Karen Bass, who is the absolutely abhorrent mayor of Los Angeles, someone who basically rivals Zormadani, New York City and Brandon Johnson in Chicago as one of the worst big city mayors in America, which is really saying something. Karen Bass, who was literally overseas twiddling her thumbs while the Pacific Palisades burned in a horrific once a century fire last January. Well, she was asked about whether non citizens should vote and she gave a doozy of an answer. Let's go ahead and play this.

[Debate Moderator]

This is a yes or no question, an answer. So there's an LA council member, he wants voters to decide. He is saying that non citizens should they be allowed to vote in local elections. Is this a yes or no, Mr. Pratt? No, Mayor Bass.

[Karen Bass]

It depends. It's not a yes or no.

[Debate Moderator]

Depends on what?

[Karen Bass]

Well, first of all, when you say non citizens, it doesn't mean they're here illegal. It doesn't mean they're undocumented. They could have green cards. They could be here. Perfectly legal. And there's a lot of states and cities that do that on very, very local elections. We have to see what the councilman is proposing.

[Debate Moderator]

Councilmember Bremen.

[Rebecca Heinrichs]

Yeah, I would say again, it does depend in other places school boards have non citizens. Non citizens.

[Debate Moderator]

Mr. Fred, I have a question for you. You told NBC News.

[Josh Hammer]

So these are the luminaries competing to be the mayor of America's second largest city, Los Angeles. Good luck because frankly, you're going to need it. Should non citizens vote?

[Commentator/Analyst]

No, no.

[Josh Hammer]

Getting back to this conversation as to who is an American. Well, first and foremost, citizens.

[Commentator/Analyst]

The we the people language of the

[Josh Hammer]

premium of the constitution does not refer to people here illegally.

[Commentator/Analyst]

Frankly does not refer to people even here legally on a green card, on

[Josh Hammer]

a student visa, tourist visa.

[Commentator/Analyst]

No, we the citizens are sovereign.

[Josh Hammer]

Consent of the governed depends on there

[Commentator/Analyst]

being a citizenry, not just the unvarnished masses. So no, non citizens should not vote. It is extraordinary, extraordinary that we are

[Josh Hammer]

even having this conversation. Nuts, frankly. Absolutely nuts. Karen Bass was just an absolute, absolute despicable laughing stock of a mayor. Again, she was literally in Africa, in Ghana serves at the time of the Palisade's fire. There was this infamous video of a journalist running up to her in the airport, actually near the jetway door to get on her flight. And she's just deliberately looking ahead, not making eye contact, just literally not saying a word. It's just, it's just really damning stuff. Really, really, really damning stuff. But ultimately really nothing as damning as an answer that you just saw there. Look, Los Angeles unfortunately has been going downhill for, I mean, essentially my entire adult lifetime. The last few times I've been there, it has been an utter atrocity. Feces, needles, homeless people of just garbage, literally and symbolically, all throughout the streets, all throughout the beaches, the piers. Downtown LA is basically just one big needle asylum. There actually was a major federal drug BUST actually at MacArthur park, which is a major park there in Los Angeles just yesterday. It's considered one of the nation's largest open air drug markets. So the feds went ahead and busted that actually they apparently got up to potentially 8 to 10 million dollars worth of fentanyl and methamphetamine just from this one drug bust. So good for the feds, actually. If you're trying to do what local and state authorities simply are not doing, whether that's due to incompetence or just unwillingness, Los Angeles can certainly do a lot better than Karen Bass. Whether it actually will do better than Karen Bass. Well, that's a different story. But as I said, good freaking love, because you guys are going to need it. Finally today, May 7, 2026, is National Prayer Day. It's National Prayer Day on the American calendar. There's actually a whole website. You can go ahead and read all about it. NationalDayofPrayer.org, we strongly encourage you to go ahead and do just that. There's actually one Bible verse that is listed front and center here on the website. It is from 1st Chronicles, chapter 16 and says, quote, tell of his glory among the nations, his wonderful deeds among all the people. So it's this message that we should tell of God's deeds and his glory and all that he has done among his people. Mike Johnson, who is a religious man himself, he is the speaker of the House from Louisiana. He is an evangelical Christian, a very good man. Whatever your objections may or may not be to his leadership, he's a very fundamentally decent human being. Mike Johnson was asked about National Day of Prayer and gave this answer.

[Mike Johnson]

Prayer has been a part of our DNA since the very beginning, as you know. So it's fitting that we do this. This formal tradition, as you know, was established by Congress at the height of the Cold War. And it reaffirms something that's so important that really goes to the heart of who we are as Americans. We are a praying nation. We always have been. It truly is part of who we are. We know that prayer is where the impossible happens. We know it's where we find solace and stay anchored in our faith, even through challenges and even through the storms.

[Josh Hammer]

Beautiful stuff. I can't help but think a little bit about George W. Bush. Not my favorite president, a pretty terrible president, frankly, George W. Bush. But he famously said that any man who does not begin his day on his knees praying is not fit to be president. And there's something to be said for that, frankly. Again, Bush, bad president, but very insightful there. But this goes back a lot longer than George Bush. I mean, George Washington, the Thanksgiving Proclamation of 1789, talking about how it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God. This is who we are. This is built in our DNA as Americans. It's a beautiful thing, the National Day of Prayer. I love, love, love this. This is part of our Big America 250 celebration there in this quarter millennium anniversary there. You too can join in anytime you want because God is always there, of course, and he is always listening to you. And we thank you for listening. For now, to the Josh Hammer show, folks. Have a great rest of your evening. We'll be right back. As always, tomorrow.