3535 - Can Nebraska Flip the Senate? The State of Iran Talks w/ John Nichols, Séamus Malekafzali

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Majority Report with Sam Seder
Episode 3535 - Can Nebraska Flip the Senate? The State of Iran Talks w/ John Nichols, Séamus Malekafzali
Release Date: July 10, 2025

---

1. News Highlights

Timestamp: [00:19] - [23:47]

The episode opens with Emma Vigeland delivering a comprehensive rundown of current events, emphasizing the systemic failures of the Republican Party in handling disaster response and other critical issues. Key news items discussed include:

• Texas Flood Crisis:

  • Death Toll: Over 120 fatalities with more than 160 individuals still missing.
  • Federal Response Blockade: A federal judge in New Hampshire has imposed a nationwide block on former President Trump's executive order to abolish birthright citizenship, highlighting ongoing legal battles over constitutional rights.
  • Kristi Noem's FEMA Policies:
    • Grant Approval Delays: Former South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem, now heading FEMA, instituted a policy requiring her personal sign-off on any federal grant exceeding $100,000. This stringent threshold has been criticized for crippling disaster response efforts.
    • Impact on Disaster Preparedness: Noem's rules were directly linked to a 72-hour delay in deploying search and rescue teams in Texas, exacerbating the humanitarian crisis.
    • Emma Quotes Noem's Defense: "[Noem] stated that CNN is spreading fake news and highlighted the immediate deployment of Coast Guard and Border Patrol teams," [09:25].

• Republican Governance and Bureaucratic Austerity:

  • Medicaid Cuts: Proposed reductions in Medicaid funding could strip healthcare from 17 million Americans, increasing economic desperation and reducing workers' bargaining power.
  • Delayed FEMA Responses: Local Texas counties, such as Kerr County, were denied crucial federal grants in the past, illustrating systemic delays in disaster response funding.

• International Incidents:

  • US-Iran Relations:
    • Military Strikes: The US-backed Israeli offensive in Iran led to significant casualties and heightened tensions.
    • Alligator Alcatraz Facility: Reports emerged of inhumane conditions at a new immigration detention center in Florida, funded by FEMA funds diverted to ICE operations. Testimonies from detainees highlighted severe human rights violations.
    • Quote from detainee Liamzi Isquierdo (Rafi Gora): "We've been here at Alcatraz since Friday. There's no water to take a bath." [16:28]

• Economic Implications:

  • Trump Administration's Economic Policies:
    • Sanctions and Tariffs: Imposition of 50% tariffs on Brazil and sanctions against UN Special Investigator Francesca Albanese signal continued aggressive economic strategies.
    • Impact on Consumer Prices: Tariffs have begun causing nationwide price increases, affecting everyday consumers.

• Social Media and Free Speech:

  • Twitter and European Union Tensions: Twitter faces scrutiny over its pro-Hitler chatbot, raising concerns about regulatory enforcement and free speech implications.

---

2. Interview with John Nichols: Dan Osborne’s Senate Bid in Nebraska

Timestamp: [23:47] - [44:09]

John Nichols, national affairs correspondent for The Nation, discusses the resurgence of Dan Osborne in Nebraska’s political landscape and its broader implications for the anti-billionaire movement in America.

Key Points:

• Dan Osborne’s Political Background:

  • Union Leadership: Osborne, a mechanic and steam fitter, gained national recognition for leading a significant strike at the Kellogg's plant in Omaha.
  • 2024 Senate Run: Running as an independent populist focused on economic issues, Osborne secured 47% of the vote, outperforming both Democratic and Republican candidates.
  • Populist Messaging: Emphasizing anti-oligarchy and reducing corporate influence, Osborne engaged directly with diverse voter bases, including Trump and Sanders supporters.

• Impact on Midterm Elections:

  • Potential Senate Flip: Osborne’s strong performance signals a shift in voter priorities towards economic populism and skepticism of billionaire influence, potentially altering the Senate’s composition.
  • Challenge to Traditional Parties: His independent stance underscores dissatisfaction with both major parties, highlighting the need for a new political narrative.

• Comparison with Bernie Sanders and New York’s Zoran Mamdani:

  • Shared Anti-Oligarchy Sentiment: Both Osborne and Mamdani harness populist sentiments against billionaire dominance, albeit in different regional contexts.
  • Democratic Party’s Missed Opportunity: Nichols critiques the Democratic Party for ignoring the anti-billionaire tide that Osborne and Mamdani successfully tapped into.

• Dan Osborne’s Vision:

  • Citizen-Centric Politics: Osborne envisions a more honest and inclusive political discourse, rejecting traditional party alignments to foster genuine change.
  • Quote from Osborne: "We get the money out of politics, then we can have an honest debate." [33:24]

Notable Insights:

• Historical Context:

  • Nebraska’s Populist Legacy: Osborne draws inspiration from Nebraska’s past, referencing figures like George Norris to revive progressive populism.

• Challenges Ahead:

  • Facing Established Opponents: Osborne contends with entrenched political figures like Pete Ricketts, a billionaire with significant resources, testing the viability of independent candidates against well-funded incumbents.

• Strategic Significance:

  • Nationwide Implications: If Osborne succeeds, it could inspire similar movements nationwide, pressing both parties to address economic populism more directly.

Closing Remarks:

John Nichols emphasizes the pivotal role of independent candidates like Dan Osborne in reshaping American politics, advocating for a move away from oligarchic influences towards more equitable economic policies.

---

3. Interview with Séamus Malekafzali: The State of US-Iran Relations

Timestamp: [46:03] - [76:44]

Séamus Malekafzali, a freelance journalist focusing on the Middle East and the Global South, provides an in-depth analysis of the escalating tensions between the United States and Iran, the collapse of nuclear negotiations, and the broader geopolitical repercussions.

Key Points:

• Recent Escalations:

  • Preemptive Strikes: The US and Israel launched significant military operations against Iranian nuclear facilities, claiming imminent threats, though reports suggest Iran was not close to attaining nuclear weapons capabilities.
  • Casualties and Destruction: Nearly a thousand Iranians have been killed, with extensive infrastructure damage, further destabilizing the region.

• Ceasefire and Its Aftermath:

  • Temporary Halt: A sudden ceasefire has been declared, raising questions about its sustainability and the motivations behind its implementation.
  • Iran’s Position: While Iran expresses willingness to return to negotiations under stringent conditions, skepticism remains regarding US assurances against future strikes.

• Internal Iranian Reactions:

  • Conservative Backlash: Hardliners within Iran criticize the government's openness to negotiations, viewing it as a sign of weakness that may compel the country to pursue nuclear armament for self-defense.
  • Public Sentiment: There is a growing divide among Iranians, with some supporting continued negotiations and others advocating for increased military capability as a deterrent.

• International Relations and Trust Issues:

  • Fractured Trust with IAEA: Allegations that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was spying on behalf of Israel have eroded trust, complicating future negotiations and verification processes.
  • Shift Towards China: Iran is exploring closer ties with China for military technology and investment, though this relationship lacks the depth of alliances seen with Western countries.

• Historical Context and Sovereignty:

  • Legacy of Foreign Intervention: Malekafzali traces Iran’s current distrust towards the US and Israel back to historical interventions, such as the 1953 coup and territorial concessions in the 19th century, which have perpetuated a narrative of foreign domination.
  • Impact on Current Policies: This historical resentment fuels Iran’s resistance to external control over its nuclear program and broader national sovereignty.

• Future Prospects:

  • Negotiation Roadblocks: Stringent demands from the US and Israel, including the complete abolition of Iran’s ballistic missile program, render future negotiations highly improbable.
  • Potential for Further Conflict: The lack of effective deterrents and continued military dominance by Israel may lead to ongoing and escalating conflicts in the region.

Notable Insights:

• Quote from Iranian Official: "We are now facing a crisis. The people are facing a crisis that we need to put behind ourselves." [53:34]

• Implications for Global Stability:

  • The inability to reach a lasting ceasefire or effective diplomatic resolutions heightens the risk of prolonged conflict, with significant humanitarian and geopolitical consequences.

• Media and Propaganda:

  • Israeli Narratives: Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Netanyahu, use propaganda to portray Iran as a perennial threat, undermining genuine efforts for peace and fostering an environment of perpetual distrust.

• Economic and Military Dependence:

  • Iran’s growing economic ties with China are seen as a strategic move to counterbalance Western and Israeli pressures, although this shift does not equate to a strong military alliance capable of deterring aggression.

Closing Remarks:

Séamus Malekafzali underscores the complexities of US-Iran relations, emphasizing the profound mistrust rooted in historical grievances and the challenges in establishing a sustainable path toward peace and mutual understanding.

---

Conclusion

This episode of The Majority Report delves into critical issues shaping American politics and international relations. Through insightful interviews with John Nichols and Séamus Malekafzali, the show explores the emerging populist movements challenging billionaire dominance in politics and the fraught state of US-Iran relations amidst escalating conflicts and failed diplomatic efforts. Notable quotes and detailed analyses provide listeners with a comprehensive understanding of these pressing topics.

Transcript

[Emma Vigeland]

You are listening to a free version of Majority Report with Sam Steder. To support the show and get another 15 minutes of daily program, go to majority SM please.

[Sam Seder]

The majority Report with Sam Cedar.

[Emma Vigeland]

It is Thursday, July 10, 2025. My name is Emma Viglund and for Sam Seder and this is the five time award winning Majority Report. We are broadcasting live steps from the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America, downtown Brooklyn, usa. On the program today, John Nichols of the Nation will be with us to talk about Dan Osborne running again in Nebraska and what it means for the anti billionaire movement across the country and also maybe flipping the Senate knocking on wood. And then later, Seamus Malik Fizzali will be back with us to talk about the state of our relationship with Iran, the lack of a ceasefire in Gaza and more. Also on the program, breaking news. A federal judge in New Hampshire places a new nationwide block on Trump's executive order to end birthright citizenship. You know that thing that's in the Constitution? The death toll rises In Texas hits 120. Over 160 people still missing. And CNN reports that Kristi Noem waited 72 hours to approve search and rescue teams. The flood prone Texas county had previously asked the state government for meager disaster preparedness funds and was denied twice. So these are, this isn't Trump. These are Republicans. House Democratic leadership finally condemns Randy Fine for attacking Ilhan Omar with racist threats. Twitter is in hot water with the European Union over its pro Hitler chatbot. If Elon was mad about their regulatory enforcement before, watch out. Unsealed court records show Stephen Miller used the Israeli government backed doxing site the Canary Mission to target pro Palestinian activists for deportation. Speaking of Israel, they bombed yet another medical center last night. Doctors warn their whole system could collapse imminently. And Netanyahu left D.C. without a ceasefire deal yesterday. Like under Biden. This is all for show for the most part. The Trump administration sanctions Francesca Albanese, the UN Special investigator looking into human rights abuses in the Palestinian territories. Trump slaps 50% tariffs on Brazil because their democracy functions. And they're prosecuting his buddy Bolsonaro for trying to overturn the election. And lastly, prices begin to rise across the country from tariffs. The July numbers show that it's hitting now. All this and more on today's Majority Report. Welcome to the show everybody. It's an M Majority Report Thursday, the first first in a long time. And we get to welcome Matt Lech back to the show. Yay. Brian is happy as a clam.

[Matt Lech]

It's Great to be back.

[Emma Vigeland]

Great to have you back. You just. What'd you do? Relaxed. Family time. Good stuff.

[Matt Lech]

Had some great family time, some great outdoors time. A lot of blue sky in North Dakota. I didn't kind of took it for granted as a kid. And it's kind of, kind of weird to look around and see. I mean, you feel like you're really on the edge of the earth when there's no clouds in the sky up there.

[Emma Vigeland]

Also, like, I just. Do you ever now when you go home like that? Notice how quiet it is? I mean, I feel like my apartment is pretty quiet relative to other areas in New York City. But it's just like, it's, it's such a, such a drastic change.

[Matt Lech]

I literally said that. I was out on the deck with my parents and I'm like, oh, it's so quiet. And they're like, no, I hear something like in the way distance there was some kind of construction going. And they're like, no, that noise, it's like, you don't understand.

[Emma Vigeland]

You don't understand it. You don't even know what noise is. Okay, let's start here. Speaking of the Dakotas, I guess Kristi Noem is in hot water right now in the press for good reason, obviously. The death toll in Texas is now over 120, 160 still missing. It's just horrible. And CNN is now reporting that Kristi Noem, former governor of South Dakota, not North Dakota. Right? Correct, correct. She oversees FEMA as a part of her, her, her role as Homeland Security head. And she implemented this rule that any grant that is over $100,000, which for the federal government is a significant majority of the grants, requires her personal sign off. And that number is so infinitesimal and small when we're talking about the federal government that it's almost difficult to even comprehend that that's the threshold that they.

[Matt Lech]

Said you can't even hire, like that's like one employee.

[Emma Vigeland]

It's, it's, it's stunning. It's meant not to be some way to cut back on wasteful spending as they'll frame it. It's a way to slow the government down to a halt so that it actually just cannot function anymore, which is what Republicans want.

[Matt Lech]

Yeah, they say they're against bureaucracy, but actually they love it when they can.

[Emma Vigeland]

Impose austerity with it, including like they're. With these Medicaid cuts, it is much cheaper to just keep people with their health care. The 17 million people that are going to lose their health care because of this horrific bill. It's cheaper to keep people on their health care than it is going to be to implement the paperwork work requirements that they say are now necessary. And kicking people off is costly in and of itself. This is about immiseration. This is about increasing the desperation of a population so that capitalists can have more leverage over them. It's the same thing when we're talking about immigration. And if you're afraid of deportation, you are more likely to be an employee that shuts up and says nothing about harassment or wage theft, what have you. It's the same thing with Medicaid, which is not a cash payment. It is health insurance. You can't pawn your Medicaid card for cash or drugs or whatever they're talking about, just the same as you can't pawn your anthem or your United Health Care card when you get it from a private insurer. So I'm a bit afield of what we want to talk about here, but it's just all a part of the same thing. And like the National Weather Service reports are indicating that it largely did its job. They did send out alerts. Even with the vacancies and the austerity. It's a testament to these career bureaucrats that the Republicans hate that they're able to even function. Our agencies are even able to function with the amount of disruption that has occurred.

[Sam Seder]

And for now.

[Emma Vigeland]

Right. For now. For now. And even still, the federal government as I'm about to as I'm discussing here with Kristi Noem, is completely a part of the failure and a huge reason for why the response time has been so poor. But it's also the local Republican Party in Texas. County records basically show that Kerr county, this area of Texas that is frequently affected by flooding, asked the state government in Texas in 2017 for $1 million in a federal grant that would be for hazard mitigation and they were denied that. Again, $1 million for a big state like Texas is nothing. They asked again in 2018 after Hurricane Harvey and then that request is denied. Just $1 million from the state of Texas.

[Matt Lech]

That's good old fashioned GOP Reaganism for you.

[Emma Vigeland]

Austerity. So but back to Kristi Noem here. Here she is this morning on FOX and Friends and they ask her about that CNN report showing that the response was delayed by 72 hours because of this stupid rule that she had to personally sign off on anything over $100,000. Here's her response that point.

[Sam Seder]

Do you CNN is basically got a report accusing you of slowing the process. Would you like to respond to that?

[Emma Vigeland]

Well, there you go. Fake news. CNN again is absolutely TR doing by saying that because our Coast Guard, our border patrol BORTAC teams were there immediately. Every single thing I was on they asked for, we were there. The governor and the emergency management director, Nim Kidd are fantastic. And nobody there has said anything about that they didn't get everything that they wanted immediately or that they needed. And I'm proud of the work that we've done to support that. But you know, we've got flooding going on in New Mexico as well, North Carolina. So I've been visiting with their leadership team and spent quite a bit of time on the phone yesterday with the New Mexico governor, getting them resources as well. And that's what we do. And you know, the fact that CNN is continuing to be political and push out fake information and false information and lies is not shocking, but it's a disservice to the country. It's a real disservice to the country because people start to mistrust anything that comes out then over the news and then. Well, that's true, yeah, but they, they.

[Sam Seder]

Just don't trust anybody anymore.

[Emma Vigeland]

And that's not the kind of country certainly we are praying. I mean, come on, come on. That wasn't a denial, by the way. I don't know if you noticed that.

[Matt Lech]

She went straight to the first responders. She went slammed directly behind them, just.

[Emma Vigeland]

Like Trump just did with Epstein. Right when he was being cornered about the Epstein cover up. He was like, what you think of the children? We got Texas. Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot about Donald Trump's humanitarian impulses. I didn't, I mean, I didn't mean to take the focus away from that. He was acting like Bernie Sanders when they tried to get him to talk about some drama. And he's like, I want to focus on the, the, the real issues affecting the American public here. Okay, it's true.

[Matt Lech]

They go back to their stump speech and their stump speeches. Actually, everyone's lying to you except me. And don't trust anything you hear from your lie.

[Emma Vigeland]

Right. But it's going to be a little bit difficult for them to avoid this for this long, especially as it keeps going. And they can't just like throw Biden's name out there, which is Trump's latest tactic. This is under his watch and he's supposed to be the strongman across all of this, but yet passing the buck is what he does best. Dropsite 2 days ago, Ryan Graham, Jessica Burbank had an article here that I think is quite relevant where you see how DHS is being run and what their priorities are. FEMA falls under the Department of Homeland Security, but they're a little bit more concerned about funding the concentration camps that they're building down in Florida. Specifically Alligator Alcatraz, the drop site reports the federal detention facility in Florida, officially named Alligator Alcatraz, is only the beginning when it comes to FEMA money being used to fund ICE operations. According to a source within the federal agency, the new program, dubbed the ICE Grant by FEMA employees, means that millions in grant funds intended for shelters and facilities for noncitizen migrants may now be redirected toward detention centers and whatever else ICE decides. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said in a statement to the Associated Press on June 25 that the detention facility in Florida, quote, will be funded in large part by the Shelter and Services program within the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The Alligator Alcatraz facility will cost $245 per bed daily or 450 million per year, one U.S. official told the AP. But boondoggle internal FEMA documents, however, put the total grant awarded to the Florida Division of emergency management at $608 million. So just let's sit with that for one second. Kristi Noem waited 72 hours to approve disaster necessary disaster responses because of this like automatic rule that they put in place that means that if it's any expenditure or grant over $100,000 that she needs her personal sign off. Now the best case scenario is is that because of the rules she put in place here, she didn't understand the urgency of the requests and there might have been a backlog of requests because that's basically every grant request that she would ever receive would be subjected to that threshold. That's the best case scenario is that she missed it. The worst case scenario is that this is what's happening is that basic essentially female and their resources are being wholly allocated to the concentration and torture of migrants. The I put this in sound. I'm not sure this is a bit of a an aside. We may not have it actually and that's okay. But maybe later in the show we'll play this report out of Florida that I don't think we have it but it's not necessary really. It's just there was a call was made. Oh, here we go. Thank you. Maybe let's play a little bit of this because the first few minutes show what this facility actually is like and you hear that they were able this local news CBS in Miami was able to speak to people on the phone from within the facility, and they gave their testimony as to actually what's happening there.

[Sam Seder]

And now at 10 tonight, concerns over conditions at Alligator Alcatraz. And tonight, for the first time, we are hearing from detainees actually inside the immigration detention facility deep in the Florida Everglades.

[Matt Lech]

Good evening.

[Sam Seder]

I'm Jim Berry. A popular Cuban reggaeton artist is among.

[Matt Lech]

Several people describing the conditions there as inhumane. CBC news, Miami's Anna McAllister joins us.

[Sam Seder]

Live from the jail in West Miami Dade where the artist was first held before being transferred to. Anna, what is being said tonight?

[Matt Lech]

Jim, this musician and the other detainees tell us that they're being treated like animals. They say they haven't bathed in days. And one man says the food that they were served was infested with maggots.

[Emma Vigeland]

We were charged with aggravated assault with.

[Sam Seder]

Deadly weapon and battery. Last week, Cuban reggaeton artist Liamzi Isquierdo.

[Matt Lech]

Known as Rafi Gora, faced a judge following an aggravated assault that happened in Miami Dade. According to La Figura's girlfriend, she received.

[Emma Vigeland]

A call from him this morning from Alligator Alcatraz.

[Matt Lech]

I am Lancy La Figura.

[Sam Seder]

We've been here at Alcatraz since Friday. There's over 400 people here. There's no water to take a bath.

[Matt Lech]

It's been four days since I've taken a bath.

[Emma Vigeland]

La Figorda goes on to talk about what he says are the horrific living.

[Matt Lech]

Conditions in San Inside the facility.

[Sam Seder]

They only brought a meal once a day.

[Matt Lech]

And it had maggots. They never take off the lights for 24 hours.

[Sam Seder]

The mosquitoes are as big as elephants.

[Matt Lech]

During the call, La Figora passes the.

[Emma Vigeland]

Phone to other detainees who describe their experience.

[Sam Seder]

They're not respecting our human rights. We're human beings. We're not dogs.

[Matt Lech]

We're like rats in an experiment.

[Sam Seder]

I don't know their motive for doing.

[Matt Lech]

This if it's a form of torture. A lot of us have our residency documents and we don't understand why we're here.

[Emma Vigeland]

Another man. That was a thank you for pulling that up so quickly. I was going to summarize it, but hearing them from them, you know, in particular is obviously important. And you hear there that they're clearly just borrowing from SEOT and applying those tactics to the United States, particularly the keeping the lights on, blaring 24 hours a day. We knew that Seekot did that. And then it was confirmed in Kilmar Abrego Garcia's account through his lawyer when he was. When he's making his case right now in court. And that is by, I mean the amount of violations of our civil rights as enshrined in the Constitution here cannot be overstated. But it's cruel and unusual punishment and there hasn't even been convictions. Like there's so many. There's a habeas corpus violation. If even if these folks were convicted of the most heinous crimes, the conditions that they're in would be described as cruel and unusual punishment under our constitution.

[Matt Lech]

Alex DeLuca reports. Since January, at least 11 people, at least 11 people have died in ICE custody nationwide. Five of those at least were in Florida. And this whole alligator Alcatraz thing, all the people that think that's funny will also think it's funny if that turns into alligator Auschwitz. And this is how death camps could start in this country. This is the trajectory they would follow. This stuff needs to be shut down while it's still in a grift and has only violated a few people's rights. But you'll see more deaths, and I mean more grift and millions of dollars towards. I mean just sustain on this country like, you know, we never, we hope to never see.

[Emma Vigeland]

I mean, we're not even talking about.

[Sam Seder]

Who'S getting rich off of this geo group.

[Matt Lech]

Disgusting.

[Emma Vigeland]

In a moment, we're going to be speaking with John Nichols. But first a word from one of our sponsors. One of our favorites, or at least one of mine. I started using Delete Me before I even started working here and I speak really high of it. Anybody that's in our profession, you are in public, you got to worry about your private data. But even if you're not right now there, you'll see in the headlines, they're chock full of data breaches and regulatory rollbacks under Trump. It makes us all vulnerable. But you can do something about it. Delete Me is here to make it easy, quick and safe to remove your personal data online. Want an easier way to deal with data breaches? Get Delete Me. The fact is we are all at risk. How many times have you gotten an email or a letter saying your data has been breached? It's unsettling. The good news is Deleteme can help. Delete Me does all the hard work of wiping you and your family's personal information from data broker websites. Deleteme knows your privacy is worth protecting. Sign up and provide Delete Me with exactly what information you want deleted. And their experts will take it from there. Deleteme sends you regular personalized privacy reports showing what information they found, where they found it and what they removed. And Delete Me isn't just a one time service. Delete Me is always working for you, constantly monitoring and removing the personal information you don't want on the Internet. It is such peace of mind for me because I'll get those reports in my email. I'll know it's still working. I don't need to check it. It's automatically catching things that could be put on the info on the Internet, put my family at risk, me at risk, that kind of thing. But even like just worrying about scams and spam calls and all those kinds of things, I just find Delete Me helps a ton in those instances. Take control of your data and keep your private life private by signing up for Delete Me now at a special discount for our listeners. Get 20% off your delete me plan when you go to JoinDeleteMe.com Majority and use promo code Majority at checkout. The only way to get 20% off is to go to JoinDeleteMe.com Majority and enter code Majority at checkout. That's JoinDeleteMe.com Majority code Majority. And you'll see in the video and podcast and blog description you can get 20% off your delete me plan when you go to joindeleteme.com majority and use promo code Majority at checkout. All right, quick break and when we come back, we'll be joined by John Nichols. We are back. And we are joined once again by friend of the show, John Nichols, national affairs correspondent for the Nation, whose piece we'll be discussing today is entitled Dan Osborne Is Ready to Mount an Ever Bolder Campaign Against Our Billionaire Dominated Politics. John, thanks so much for coming back on the show.

[Sam Seder]

It's an honor to be with you.

[Emma Vigeland]

Great to talk to you. Excited to talk to you about this news. I mean, it's relatively new, but Dan Osborne is running again. Earlier this week it was kind of official. Official. A lot of folks after he so overperformed both expectations and Kamala Harris in The state in 2024 anticipated that this was likely to happen. But you interviewed him for the Nation. Just speak a little bit about how this came to be and what this announcement kind of means for the midterms in 2026.

[Sam Seder]

Well, Emma, you've probably got the most astute audience around, so I don't have to give them a lot of background on Dan Osborne. But for anybody that's tuning in, Dan Osborne is a mechanic and a steam fitter union leader who was at the Kellogg's plant out in Omaha and led a big strike out there. It was a vital strike at a critical time, got a lot of national attention and he really held his own. He into it, he was, he was strong. He was on a lot of tv, a lot of media, and people said, hey, you know what, you ought to get into politics. Most people are wise enough to say no, but he, he, he was interested. His dad had been a Republican county commissioner, so he had a little bit of background, he knew his way around politics a little bit, and he decided to run, ran in 2024, determined that the way to do it was as an independent populist, and particularly an economic populist. Got 47% of the vote for the U.S. senate, which was incredible. Running way ahead of the ticket, the national ticket in the state of Nebraska, but also significantly running ahead of other Democrats who. Or other figures. Remember Osborne and independent, but running ahead of Democrats who are challenging Republican senators in other states. And that's sort of the critical thing. It's like the Democratic Party is always looking for ways to win. Progressives are looking for ways to win. And what Osborne said is, look, I have to do this on my own. I've got to do this as a genuine independent. If I do, it can work and I can deliver a progressive populist economic message. And lo and behold, it did. He did very, very well. And he anticipated the post election analysis of a lot of Democrats, which is to say that he focused on economic issues, he listened to people. He went out into rural areas, urban areas, everywhere in the state, to 200 town meetings in direct contact, had events I went to with him where he drew Trump backers and Bernie Sanders backers and they did not agree. And he recognized that. He listened to him. He would dial down the tensions and often say, look, is there anything we can agree on that maybe corporations are too powerful? And lo and behold, got a lot of connection. Obviously he was ahead of the curve. And you know, I've always thought that he would probably run again because he's smart and you never run once. If you get close, you run again. And so he's running again, just announced. And if anything, in talking to him, he's more populist than before. I mean, he's really, he's coming at it. And maybe that's because he's running against an incumbent Republican senator who is the son of a billionaire.

[Emma Vigeland]

Yeah, and I want to get into his opponent in just a second, but there's so much that you talked about there that I think is really important to dive into. And we're going to draw a lot of parallels with Zoran Mamdani in New York because the anti billionaire or the economically populous strain is. Even though they're on opposite sides of the country, that's the thread that connects it. But the establishment Democrats would say that Osborne's success as an independent was more about like, okay, he didn't talk about cultural issues and focused on class. But when Mamdani is successful in New York, he talked, he talked about the billionaires too. But he is going to be at the pride parade with the trans flag. And that's more, you know, that's appropriate politics for New York City and in that context. But they still seem to like ignore the anti billionaire thing being the tide that lifts all boasts votes for candidates that are challenging Republicans. That's, it's clearly so salient. And Osborne almost preceded the Mamdani success in Nebraska in the fall.

[Sam Seder]

So here's the thing to understand, and you know this, Emma, your audience does as well. This is a great big country.

[Emma Vigeland]

Yeah.

[Sam Seder]

And we have states and regions that are very different from one another. It and people are going to do their politics in different ways in different places. But there are certain core questions of the moment that are incredibly salient. And one of them is, is whether we're going to be an oligarchy.

[Emma Vigeland]

Right.

[Sam Seder]

And it's interesting if we're going to tie things together here, here's an interesting way to tie them together. And I will tell you, having been around Mamdani and around Osborne and around a ton of other candidates that we don't talk about enough, coming from all sorts of different perspectives in all sorts of different places. What I'll tell you is there is sort of a constant here, and that is Bernie Sanders. And Bernie Sanders is enthusiastic about both of these things that are happening for different regions, but for the same core concept. Remember, Bernie Sanders started his Fighting Oligarchy tour not in New York or not in California, but in Omaha, Nebraska. Right. And he went there. And the shock of it back in February, where a lot of Democrats in Washington were just completely clueless, had no idea how to respond to their defeats in the presidential race, in the congressional races, the kind of overwhelming arrival of Trump and Trumpism in Washington, really struggling with it. I think Americans were wondering, where's the opposition? What Sanders decided to do is go out to America, right. And see, well, are there people ready to push back? Where did he begin? He began in Omaha, Nebraska. And to his shock, he got more people than anybody expected. They had overflow crowds. And that was the beginning of everything we've talked about since with this fighting oligarchy moment. Well, the one person probably wasn't surprised that fighting oligarchy got traction in Omaha was Dan Osborne, because he had gone out across the state. And it's interesting when you say that he doesn't focus a lot on cultural issues. Dan Osborne is pro choice. He is somebody.

[Emma Vigeland]

I meant that's the narrative. I want to be clear. Yeah, I know.

[Sam Seder]

You know that.

[Emma Vigeland]

Yes.

[Sam Seder]

Emphasize one of the subtleties of the 2024 race in which Dan Osborne did so well, the TV ads against him because they got scared of him. He started rising fast and they got scared. The TV ads against him ripped into him for being pro choice. Right. He was attacked on, on particularly some of these issues. Right. So people in Nebraska knew at least something about the play, the broader play and all these political issues. But what they heard especially was what he was saying about economics, what he was saying about the injustice of our economic system at this point. And so I think that one of the things that I've always tried to talk about in politics is volume strategies. What do you turn the volume up on? I mean, what can people hear above all the other discourse? And I can tell you, I've been in rooms in Nebraska, in union halls, in relatively smaller towns where Dan Osborne was up in front of, not with a microphone, even just standing at a table with a crowd of people in the room, and there was disagreement. There were people who would step up and say, well, I disagree with you on this, or I like this, or I care about this. And what he would say is, yeah, you know what? In America, we're going to disagree, right? We're going to have some differences. But can we agree that multinational corporations defining our trade policy, defining our economic policy, defining how we deal with health care, defining how we deal with everything, is maybe a bad idea. And the interesting thing that I've seen just on reporting on this is that an awful lot of people in those rooms, Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives, Trump backers and Sanders backers, said, you know, at the end of the day, I am so frustrated, I'm so angry with where our politics is that I'm going to give you a chance because you are a mechanic, you're a steam fitter, you're a union leader, you're not a career politician. You look a lot like me. You drove up in a pickup truck. And maybe sending somebody like you to the Senate won't solve all the problems. Maybe you won't even do all the things I'd want you to do, but perhaps you might open up our politics enough so that we've got an honest discourse in America. And I'll tell you one last thing. I'll just throw over talk this. When I asked Dan Osborne, what's the thing at core that you would change, it was really interesting because he went right to Citizens United.

[Emma Vigeland]

Yeah.

[Sam Seder]

And he says, we get the money out of politics, then we can have an honest debate. But until we do.

[Emma Vigeland]

Yeah. And I mean, there's. So it creates a narrative. Right. The Democrats have been missing a broad narrative that can cross the country in Nebraska or in New York City. And we. It's on a silver platter. It's here. It's the anti billionaire. It's the oligarchy thing. But they won't take it. They won't seize it. And what's great about this narrative is it's not that the Democrats are good stewards of the system that people already think aren't working for them, and they'll be the right kind of bureaucrat that makes the machine that is making your life worse function better. Like, that's what the grand narrative has been. They're avoiding this and they're taking it as like, oh, well, he avoided this issue, that it doesn't poll test well. Or he didn't go on. He was maybe a little bit more. More hawkish on the border than other Democrats. And like, let's move in that direction as opposed to the obvious in your face, like, emphasis on one thing. Because here's the thing about polling is we see how like gun control polls across the country, 80%, 90% percent other thing, even things like money and politics, polls very well. It doesn't matter how something polls if people aren't going to the polls based on that issue. Trans issues. It's the same thing. It's the exact same thing. But. But something that people would go to the polls for would be somebody that says, I'm going to tax billionaires and make your life better by going after them. And it's right there. And there's so many national Democrats who refuse to recognize it.

[Sam Seder]

It's totally true. It's kind of a nightmare. It's kind of like a surreal situation. And again, I will emphasize to you, Dan Osborne is not a Democrat.

[Emma Vigeland]

Right.

[Sam Seder]

This is a big deal to understand. He is sort of a pox on both parties. He literally told me the other day that if he wins the seat, he's going to Take a lawn chair, the kind you put up behind your place when you're having a barbecue, it's going to take a lawn chair out to Washington. And when they do the State of the Union, he's going to go put that chair between the two parties. Right.

[Emma Vigeland]

As he should, because the Democratic brand is so toxic. That's the other thing he's smart about. And that's an unfortunate thing for us to realize, but in a state like Nebraska, he has a better chance as an independent than with the D next to his name.

[Sam Seder]

Yeah. And you know who's recognized that? A guy who, you know, many decades ago looked at a very, very Republican, historically very Republican state, a state that voted for George H.W. bush in 1988 and decided to run for federal office as an independent and won ultimately, and then won a Senate seat. His name's Bernie Sanders. Right. And so sometimes, you know, now we think of Vermont as a very, very liberal state, a very Democratic state. What we don't recognize is that it wasn't that long ago that it was a different state. And so sometimes you find your way in as an independent where you end up. Well, that's an open question. Right. And I'm not here to tell you what Dan Osborne will ultimately do politically that's, you know, have him on. He'd probably come on and love to talk to you.

[Emma Vigeland]

We would love to. Yeah.

[Sam Seder]

But what I will tell you is this, in talking to him a lot, I can tell you that he goes deeper than a lot of, a lot of our political strategists and pollsters do. You know, when I, when I asked him about, you know, kind of what's, what are you trying to, what are you looking for? What kind of coalition are you kind of trying to create? He went back to 1900, you know, the early 1900s, and he said, you know, there were populist movements in the 1890s, early 1900s that brought together folks who thought they were Democrats, thought they were Republicans, thought there were a lot of things and said, you know, look, in this post Civil War era, Right. Maybe we need to open up to understand that a lot's changing. We're moving into an industrial, we're in an industrial revolution. There's a lot of stuff going on. Maybe the politics of the past isn't sufficient for where we're at. And so a lot of people in Nebraska actually supported that. Nebraska was once a very progressive populist state, sent George Norris to the Senate, et cetera. And so Osborne is exploring this and he, you Know, he really is, you know, a working class guy. And, and that's part of his huge appeal. But another part of his appeal is he's thought long and hard. You know, when you're driving across Nebraska, it's a long way, you know, that's you going out to western Nebraska. You're in that truck for a long time. You can either listen to the radio or whatever, or you can think. And, and I think that he has thought a lot about what that next politics is. And the truth of the matter is that a Republican Party of Donald Trump and Elon Musk is not going to be home to that next politics. Right. They have chosen oligarchy, they've chosen the billionaire class.

[Emma Vigeland]

Josh Hawley is just doing a performance with the populism thing. Osborne recognizes there's no home for it in that party.

[Sam Seder]

I think that's right. Although, you know, look, even Hawley, you dislike him as you may, he's smart enough to recognize that it's not bad to talk about that.

[Emma Vigeland]

Right? Right. I just like him writing that op ed about save Medicaid and then voting for the bill that destroys Medicaid. Like, I mean, I'm just sick of rehabilitating this, this, this asshole.

[Sam Seder]

But anyway, yeah, but, but so what, what we can accept is there's not a place in the Republican Party for this.

[Emma Vigeland]

Right.

[Sam Seder]

But the question is whether there's a place in the Democratic Party for it. What Osborne has determined is that people in Nebraska don't think so. Right. Or they, they don't sufficiently. Now there's Jane Cleave and other people who are out there, some really good folks are trying to rebuild the Democratic Party out there. And I give them credit for that. Right. There's a lot of, you know, there's a lot of different entry points, a lot of people trying to come at this in different ways. But Osborne is going to do an experiment basically, and is going to say, look, is there a space for a next politics? And if there is, can you build a coalition sufficient to be a member of one of the wealthiest families in America, a guy who literally engineered his own appointment to the Senate? That's Pete Ricketts. Can you beat this guy who literally has unlimited money, unlimited access to power with a coalition of people who maybe don't even identify ideologically, but who are frustrated and upset with where America is headed? If he does that, very up for grabs, we don't know where this election will go. But if he pulls that off, then the message for the Democratic Party is there's some obvious north stars out there that you ought to be looking at. Right?

[Emma Vigeland]

I mean, I wish they would. It seems obvious to everybody, but they're financially invested in putting the blinders on. And, and that's, I guess, where I would love to kind of maybe wrap here with you, John, is just this. When you mentioned the Nebraska Democratic Party, it's a dance, right? Because Osborne doesn't want to be associated with the brand of the Democratic Party because it would be bad for him electorally. And that makes total sense. But it occurs to me that it might not be as much of an albatross in 26 as it was in 2024. Coming off the Biden administration and with the Harris campaign just being so feckless down the stretch and the, the, the backlash to the explicitly pro billionaire agenda of the Republicans might make it so that, like, they're going to run ads saying he's secretly a Democrat, the Democratic Party is working on his behalf. And like, they want, they, they want him to win. That's true. But maybe those attacks don't land in the same way they would have two years prior because of the, the conditions I'm describing.

[Sam Seder]

You've laid a lot of important stuff out here. So let's do it. Let's go through it quickly. First, the Nebraska Democratic Party, which I've looked at pretty seriously as I do it, these parties all over the country is sort of in the forefront trying to do it better. And, and I think they are, there are some pretty creative people there and led by their chair. And so I don't think it's about the Nebraska Democratic Party. Right, right. This is about the national party and then the image of the national party and where that's headed. That's a complex issue. But we know that, that it has often been demonized in advertising. And, you know, there's a, there's all sorts of strategies related to that. Will it be different 2026? Of course it will be different. Look at 2018, which was the first midterm of Trump's first term. People were shocked by how well Democrats did. They, they won governorships, they won Senate seats, they won House seats. At sort of an amazing level, they actually stalled the Trump agenda, you know, in that midterm election. So, yes, there was a shift. And will there be a similar shift in 2026? I think it is very possible. However, the one council, I'll give you is how big a shift is it? Right. Is it sufficient to really kind of alter the direction? Now, we saw that in the spring in Wisconsin when we had the state Supreme Court race and Elon Musk came in and tried to spend $25 million to flip the race to the Trump conservative candidate, the reaction against that was overwhelming. The total for the progressive candidate in that Supreme Court race went through the roof. Counties shifted all over the place. Now, that was a nonpartisan race, wasn't Democrat versus Republican. It was a nonpartisan race. And so you had this sort of real time evidence that, boy, if you've got an identity in the race of you're running against oligarchy, you're running against the billionaire class and somebody like Musk or even Trump makes that super clear. I think possibilities open up all over the place. But the last thing I'll leave you with is when Democrats kind of pull the brake on that, when they're overly cautious, when they're not too blunt because they may be flying out to someplace to have a dinner with donors the next day. Right. They undermine the possibility. So you're absolutely right, 2026 can be different. But how different?

[Emma Vigeland]

That's the question. That's the question. Yep. Absolutely. John Nichols, I could talk to you about this for forever, but appreciate your time today, everybody. Check out the Nation, if you aren't already reading it. You must not like the show that much because we plug you guys all the time. Thanks so much, John. Really appreciate your time today.

[Sam Seder]

Great honor to be with you. I mean, I love the work you're doing.

[Emma Vigeland]

Thanks. And likewise. All right, folks, quick break and when we come back, we are going to be speaking about Iran, the city of the Middle east, with Seamus Malafik, Sali Fatsali. He'll be with us in just a second. It's.

[Sam Seder]

Sam.

[Emma Vigeland]

We are back and we are joined now by Seamus Malak Festival but Salih, freelance journalist, writer, whose work focuses on the Middle east and the global South. You can follow him on Substack. Seamus, thanks so much for coming back on the show.

[Matt Lech]

My pleasure.

[Emma Vigeland]

I wanted to talk to you a bit about the state of the talks with Iran and especially after the United States bombed Iran, backed up Israel in its offensive belligerence in Iran, killing hundreds, maybe. Let's take a step back and if you don't mind recapping a bit what the chain of events has been over the past six weeks or so with escalation intentions.

[Matt Lech]

I mean, Iran and the United States were in nuclear negotiations in Oman, in direct negotiations. And apparently throughout the entirety of that, there was apparently very good progress. All these different roadblocks had been overturned and There was a real chance of a deal and that turned out to be total deceit. The United States really hammered in the idea that they would accept nothing else than zero nuclear enrichment, period. There are a bunch of different ways that they went about attempting to finagle some sort of. I don't, I don't even know what you'd call it. I mean, I mean, they, they talked about, well, Iran would have a right to nuclear enrichment, but they wouldn't actually be able to enrich anything. They could enrich the uranium in a different country and then they could have it sent back Iran all kinds of different ways to get around the most obvious sovereign right they had. And when Iran did not back down on that, Israel launched the war, saying that Iran was, you know, days away from being able to construct 15, 10 nuclear weapons, as you said, nearly, which is insane.

[Emma Vigeland]

They were at 60% enrichment right at that time is what the, even the, that which might be an overemphasis, but that's what the Western press was saying. They would have needed 90% enrichment to do that. There was no imminent threat. But of course, that's like what the threadbare lie that they're relying on here.

[Matt Lech]

Exactly. I mean, this thing they've been talking about Iran being a week, a month, hours away from a nuclear weapon for, I mean, as long as I've been alive practically. It's been that in the, in the narrative, in the general narrative. But now, of course, they had to act. It was a preemptive strike, you know, yada, yada, yada. And because of that, almost a thousand Iranians were killed. People are still missing under the rubble. And now the war has very suddenly come to an end. After the United States came in, struck Fordo and Natanz with bunker busters in a massive escalation, Iran retaliated by bombing a US base in Qatar near Doha.

[Emma Vigeland]

Although telegraphed to Trump, which telegraphed, which he then bragged about in public, which is very non traditional, but yeah, yeah, telegraphed.

[Matt Lech]

I mean, symbolic in the sense that it was a number of bunker busters. Yeah, it was symbolic.

[Emma Vigeland]

It just shows how reasonable Iran is being throughout this entire process of belligerence by Israel in the United States.

[Matt Lech]

And the reasonability thing is leading to this situation where this war could easily break out again in that now there's a ceasefire, very sudden ceasefire. The Iran is still talking about, well, maybe we could go back to the negotiating table if the United States gives us guarantees that it won't strike again. But the idea that the United States could give any sort of solid guarantee. It's gone completely out the window. I mean, Witkoff is again doing, leading these negotiations, these proposed negotiations, and now they're asking for the sky even more so than they were last time. Now it's no. Now it's not only no nuclear enrichment, now Netanyahu wants a complete abolition of their ballistic missile production. Non nuclear, just their ballistic missiles Never.

[Emma Vigeland]

Ever, ever going to happen. That's a poison pill.

[Matt Lech]

Yeah, poison pill. I mean, you're essentially saying that a regional power has no right to self defense.

[Emma Vigeland]

Yeah.

[Matt Lech]

And additionally, they're also saying that Trump apparently wants a full fledged peace deal with the Islamic Republic, similar to, I guess, the Abraham Accords, but with the United States, which is absolutely never going to happen. And so they're proposing all these different things that are going to be increasingly unpalatable to the Islamic Republic's leadership. And yet the Iranian state, the President, are, are kind of continuing to act like, oh, well, maybe there's something that can be done. And it's leading to a lot of different discord. I mean, the Tucker Carlson interview that just occurred, President Masood Peseshkian spoke to Carlson and was like, hey, you know, we're still willing to talk to the United States if, you know, there are all these guarantees that are willing to be provided. And when that interview came about, something like 30 Conservative MPs just published a letter where they, they took the President to task and were like, hey, you're projecting a lot of weakness here needlessly and it would really be appreciated if you didn't do that to an American journalist.

[Emma Vigeland]

It's I, it's enabling the hardliners. Yeah, it's. I'm sorry, Seamus.

[Matt Lech]

Yeah, no, no, no, it's enable, it's enabling hardliners. We're going back to this. I thought we saw this again with Gaza, with Lebanon and now with Iran, where we can't get out of this pattern that we're in where we kind of have to pretend that we can still trust American and Israeli guarantees if they can come to some sort of amicable solution. But that period is over.

[Emma Vigeland]

Absolutely. And I want to play that exchange that you're referring to. This is part two that Seamus just referenced when Tucker Carlson. Some of these questions are good. Like, it's just, it's crazy to say that, but it was a good get for him to get this interview and he asked some relevant things. This is when Tucker asked the President of Iran, who came in as a reformer, but is now, as you say, getting hit for not being hawkish enough because a thousand Iranians are dead from Israel and US Bombs. Asked here about Tucker Carlson, about their openness to diplomacy, do you have plans.

[Sam Seder]

To re enter negotiations with the United States with envoy Steve Witkoff or anyone else? And if not, what do you think will happen?

[Matt Lech]

We see no problem in reentering the negotiations. But before that, I have to remind you that because of the atrocities by the Zionist regime, by Israel, not just against my country, but in the whole region, we are now facing a crisis. The people are facing a crisis that we need to put it behind ourselves.

[Sam Seder]

Our commanders were off duty.

[Matt Lech]

They were spending the night at their homes with their families, but they were killed.

[Sam Seder]

And this is a war crime according.

[Matt Lech]

To the international law, because they were off duty, as I said, or our scientists were also killed and assassinated along with their families and their wives and their children. They were also killed, pregnant women, children. They were killed in the atrocities, in the attacks of the Israeli regime. Just because they wanted to kill one single person, they had to demolish and destroy a whole building. And as a result of this, a lot of innocent people were killed. A lot of people were killed.

[Sam Seder]

And as I said, there is this.

[Matt Lech]

Crisis that we have to put it behind ourselves. And there is a condition, there is a provision for the restarting the talks. How are we going to trust the United States again? We reenter the negotiations, then how can we know for sure that in the middle of the talks the Israeli regime will not be given the permission again to attack us?

[Emma Vigeland]

That is an excellent question, but you're Seamus, across some of the Iranian domestic reaction to this. Can you both expand on his comments and how they're being perceived internally in Iran, which you touched on earlier. But just if you could expand on it.

[Matt Lech]

I mean, when Possession was running for president, there was a big criticism from a conservative camp who were backing Saeed Yali, who was a nuclear negotiator, who was once criticized as a failure but now has a much warmer reputation after the myriad betrayals by the American negotiating team. The criticism was that continuing to emphasize the importance of negotiations, that engaging with the west was placing Iran in a, in a weak position, that it was pursuing a failed strategy and that this would eventually come to bite the country in the back in the future. And now, I mean, the, the response that I've seen from the conservative media has probably been, I mean, why has, why are we still doing this? Why is the foreign minister still talking about potentially going back to the negotiating table? Why is the president talking about potentially Negotiating with the Americans. I mean, that phrase about, like, like putting this crisis behind us, it's like, we haven't gotten. They're critical of why any. I mean, one thing I should say is that when the ceasefire was declared very suddenly in the middle of the night, there was this lack of belief that this was possible. The tone in the conservative media, on state television in Iran, was that discussing a ceasefire when Israel was attacking so severely, so violently would be treasonous. That Iran had the upper hand, that it needed to follow the. The Houthi model of striking 10 times harder than the Americans were striking. All of the. The mood was that it needed to expand. Like, we're in the existential war right now that has always been promised, and we need to act like it. And then when that ceasefire suddenly happens, everybody's just kind of bewildered and is wondering, where do we go from here? Where does this whole world especially.

[Emma Vigeland]

Especially because the reports are we don't get accurate information about casualties out of Israel. We just don't, because they always are trying to project strength. But from. From what we've heard, the Iranian strikes, it punctured the Iron Dome. Right. And Israel was in a weak position. So there's speculation that, that the ceasefire that was so rushed was like Trump pushing it over. The ceasefire, I'm putting in quotes, pushed over the finish line here because Israel was suffering losses. And so if you're a hawk within Iran, and I know we talk about Iran here domestically as if they don't have their own conservatives and liberals and hawks and doves and like their own political system, but if you're a hawk in Iran, you're going to say, why did we stop hearing? What did we even gain at. Of this.

[Matt Lech]

Yeah. And I mean, the thing you're talking about with Israel taking losses, there were people talking about that if this were to go further, if this were to go into another week or two, another few weeks, that Israel would have seen much more devastating effects from the fact they were running out of interceptor missiles. Now, America can supply those, and that's still a major concern, but they were reaching that bottleneck. And now that there is a ceasefire, I mean, I mean, I follow reformist figures, I follow reformist journalists inside Iran. And even though they're obviously happy that they're not getting bombed every single day by the Israeli air Force, we've seen what happens with ceasefires in Gaza and in Lebanon, even during those periods of relative peace. I mean, there were still daily strikes. There's still daily strikes in Lebanon and southern Lebanon. Israeli troops kept moving in southern Lebanon just yesterday. And now Israel is talking about striking Iran again to keep it in compliance with the ceasefire if it moves to reconstruct the nuclear program. So they, the concern that was raised at that time was like, okay, we've lost the, the ladder of escalation here, and now we're forced back into a reactive position. I mean, this has been a really devastating war. I mean, hundreds of people have died, nearly a thousand people have died. But this situation might be worse after this. It might be a situation that we can't easily get ourselves out of. And that's, that's, that's a real, that's a real concern.

[Emma Vigeland]

The incentive is for Iran to make a nuclear weapon. That's what they're basically, I think that Israel and the United States would be okay with that outcome if it is pursued, but if it's achieved, then there's a level of deterrence that Iran didn't previously possess. And that's probably what the hardliners are saying, right? Like, what can we do to prevent ourselves from being bombed when the US Is not engaging in negotiations in good faith and maybe even was engaging in negotiations with us as some sort of stalling tactic to put their defenses down so that, that Israel could bomb? The internal conversations with Iran should be like, well, what else, what other deterrent do we have except for creating our own nuclear weapon?

[Matt Lech]

I mean, when the war was happening, there were members of parliament who were on television practically begging the Supreme Leader to construct a nuclear weapon, to remove his fatwa against nuclear weapons. There were protests in the streets, demonstrations, people were chanting for an atomic bomb. There is a real sense of like, in the, in the public discourse in a way that it really wasn't beforehand, even if it had been trending that way, but it suddenly just explodes onto the scene. If we're being accused of constantly having a nuclear weapon, if we're doing all these symbolic retaliations, why on earth don't we have this? The primary roadblock to that, though, is that, okay, you have the state television, you have the media, you have members of parliament, but then you have the military leadership, and then the supreme leader and those individuals don't. Are not publicly saying that they want a nuclear weapon. They're even warning against this calls for this in the media. Mohsen Rezai, a major general, IRGC major general, went on TV and said there were no plans to change that doctrine. The President Pysishkin also said that there would be no chance that they're going to make A nuclear weapon as long as the supreme leader, Khamenei is still alive. And that could be, you know, years and years. If there is no Israeli assassination strike, which they have threatened, I mean, then that could continue to be the case. They're insisting on this sort of moral stand against being as bad as their enemies, like Iraq under Saddam Hussein, like America. And the, in the end, I mean, what's the, what's the effect of that? They have no, they have no, no deterrence like you're talking about.

[Emma Vigeland]

Right. Especially when the deal, the details of the JCPOA were so favorable to the United States under 4% enrichment. I mean, this is clearly civilian usage. And now there's this, not just a level of mistrust that has been deep mistrust that has been exacerbated by the events of the past 10 years since Trump withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal. That was working. It also, shoot, I lost my train of thought a little bit, but sows a level of mistrust on that front. But it also, here's what I meant to say. It fractures the relationship between the IAEA and the International Atomic Energy. I'm forgetting the exact acronym. But the inspectors who were looking at, to see if Iran was abiding by the agreement laid out in the jcpoa, and they were. But now I'm seeing that there are claims from the Iranian government that they believe that the IAEA was spying on behalf of Israel. And so what this has also done is it's fractured the relationship between the inspectors and the United States as well, or. And Iran as well.

[Matt Lech]

Yeah. I mean, there was a vote in Parliament that was virtually unanimous to stop cooperating with the iaea. And now I think that only goes through the Supreme National Security Council. They have to get some sort of authorization through there. But that's right. I mean, that transparency is gone. It benefited Iran almost nothing. And now it is much harder to verify what Iran is actually doing with the program, attempting to get any sort of international guarantee to that effect. And I mean, it just also works to confirm that Europe, despite at one time portraying itself as a much more reasonable negotiating partner, is now much more in line with the United States. I mean, during the war, the new German Chancellor Mertz was talking about Israel doing its dirty work, Europe's dirty work in regards to the war. And when Iran made a whole big show about going to negotiate with Europe, showing it as like, okay, we can't negotiate with America, but we can negotiate with the eu. Then the French representative goes on television and says, Actually, no, we agree that there should be no nuclear enrichment. Their goals are exactly the same as the United States. And I'm sure if the subject becomes about getting rid of its ballistic missile capabilities or getting rid of any other thing that Iran has, Europe will be exactly in line with this. It forces Iran into whether or not it wants it to. It is becoming more and more isolated as other countries reveal what their actual intentions are. And Iranian diplomats were very bewildered to this fact during the negotiating process before the war, and they seem to be getting it more after the war. But to the degree that it may actually change their calculus, I'm. I'm not sure.

[Sam Seder]

Sure.

[Matt Lech]

I'm not sure yet.

[Emma Vigeland]

Could it change their relationship with China where they're maybe more open than they had been previously and it might have been smarter for them to engage in China and buy Chinese weapons more so than they had been, honestly, given the lack of good faith, to put it mildly, by Europe and the United States and of course, Israel. Real.

[Matt Lech]

The relationship with China has been a real topic of discussion within Iran about this. I mean, as soon as the war ended, Iranian military representatives went to China, went to look at that technology, and there are scattered reports. I'm unsure of the veracity about whether or not they're going to work to buy Chinese military technology, buy jets that could maybe be able to work against Israeli jets, because Israeli jets really were not Iranian jets, were not a problem for the Israeli jets during the course of the war because they're so outdated. But to the degree that, I mean, people were. I think some people were expecting that China would really step in and defend Iran against the war. And that flurry of, I guess a feeling of betrayal or wondering if, if like a relationship can be forged with China where that can take place. I think it's a bit misguided. It can't get to the extent that, like America has with Israel, that sort of alliance.

[Emma Vigeland]

I mean, definitely not. And China's also not interested in overextending itself in the ways of the United States is militarily, it's not in their interest. But they do want to. They want to incur on US Influence in the region. And I feel like they the bit the best avenue for that is a relationship with Iran, although they do seem to want both a harmonious relationship with Saudi Arabia and Iran, given them brokering those talks over Yemen two years ago, which I still think is like an underreported story here about China's relationship with the Middle East.

[Matt Lech]

And they also want a cordial relationship With Israel. I mean they sell military weapons to Israel so they can't, can't, they can't become an adversary in that way. They can't be a guarantor of Iran's security. Yeah, but trying to invest, I mean there is a whole push towards the east under President Raisi, the previous president. There were deals for investments that were signed where the details are murky. That's a trend that's going to continue and Iran can still benefit from that by buying its military technology. But it's not going to be a, a high level Warsaw Pact, NATO like alliance like I think some people want.

[Emma Vigeland]

Well, for all of its talk about how it's the Chinese Communist Party, I mean they are operating in pure capitalistic self interest in many ways which is just like no one's slowing our role in terms of our being the economic powerhouse as the United States eats itself. Why would we do what they're doing? Overextending themselves militarily and neglecting their domestic technology and their population back home. So you know, this is just a benefit to China if nothing else. As we kind of wrap here, Seamus, I'm wondering if you could expand a little bit on the history of the United States and it making demands of Iran's energy production and resources and how like just tapping into how this, this, this attempt to control Iran's civilian nuclear program just must bring up so much of the pain within the Iranian population about the United States overthrowing the democratically elected leader of Iran because they, they dared to try to audit BP to find out how much BP was stealing from the people of Iran. That clearly for me, at least from the outside, that must be a connection that many people are drawing or a history that is important for the west to understand.

[Matt Lech]

No, I mean continuously Iran's history over the past two centuries, three centuries has been larger. Foreign powers are taking Iran in sovereignty and it is incumbent on Iran to take that sovereignty back by force. I mean there's a deep connection there with like the Treaty of Turkey monchai in the 19th century where Iran was forced to give up a large amount of its territory to Russia. That's something that happened in the 19th century. But when Foreign Minister Zarif who negotiated the original jcpoa when he was questioned before Parliament, he was very loudly accused of negotiating a modern day treaty of Turkomancha shy. It's that level of connection there, like these historical wrongs are all connected and they're continuous and they're never ending. So giving away Iran and sovereignty in any way shape or form is a real, obviously it's a pretty big demo in any country, but in Iran in particular. So the idea that Iran could give up and always emphasize as a civilian nuclear program. Nuclear scientists have continuously said like, like we would love to be able to build a nuclear weapon. But comm has stringently always said we couldn't do that, so we never did. And even though it was civilian, even though they made those deals, even though they constantly were transparent with international observers, the United States continuously, from the moment that nuclear program was revealed in the early 2000s, have attempted to get rid of it, put controls on it essentially that the Iran would be placed under some sort of international protectorate, that it couldn't be trusted with nuclear power. And I mean in the past with like Libya for example, the idea was that, right, okay, this is a country with a nuclear program, but it's willingly giving it up, up. And it shows that like, hey, this is, this is a path that's, that's maybe fruitful for you Iran. Maybe you could do something like this and you can re. Engage with the West. And there was a popular perception that Iran could maybe one day engage with the West. And then what happened in both these cases? Libya, its government was overthrown, NATO intervened, and now it's a complete failed state. Nothing operates. It's, it's a, it's a basket case. And in Iran's case there, Netanyahu is openly. You still using the Libya model as a model for Iran in the future. It's not just about the nuclear power. The concern about it, that long standing concern for the past 20 years that has always been a cover for wanting regime change, wanting chaos, wanting the country to essentially fall apart. Yeah, when, when the ceasefire negotiations were happening, one of the American negotiators was quoted in Axio saying that like, when will the, essentially paraphrasing when will the Iranians understand that they might not have a country if they don't agree to this? Like that's the level of what they want essentially.

[Emma Vigeland]

I mean, Iran, it's just. All right, just to rant for a second. Iran is like in the cradle of civilization and has such a rich historical history that this little ass, you know, teenage, angsty teen country over here in the United States can't even dream of having like the, the ancient rich history that Iran does. I mean, give me a break here. You won't have a country. The arrogance of this Iranian history is rich and storied and we don't get to just like come in there and change the makeup of this entire nation based because what, because Israel wants it. Like there's no recognition that people in Iran are going to have the obvious reaction that they need that they, that the rational reaction that they're not going to just accept Israel's like hand picked person to lead their country because of all the history that came before it, of the hatred between the Zionist project and of course Iran and the belligerence that the United States and Israel have engaged in.

[Matt Lech]

No, I mean Israel from the beginning of the war. Netanyahu goes on TV in English, mind you, and attempts to speak to the Iranian people and use Iranian protest slogans like women, Life, Freedom and is under the impression, I'm sure he doesn't actually believe this, but wants to give the impression that the Iranian people are secretly pro Israel, pro American, hate Islam in all of its forms and invokes the name Osiris the Great. You know those thousands year old monarchs that these people they, we used to be friends with the Jewish people. Surely we can be friends again in this, in this proto state that we've created that is entirely unlike the relationship that existed before. But you can think about this fantasy version of it wherein this, this fantastical history remains in the present day that we can all go back to this monarchy that everyone is happy to live under that is perfectly in line with Western civilization, what it wants and everybody can just be, could just be happy. It doesn't have to be complicated. But who believes this? Really? People in Los Angeles.

[Emma Vigeland]

Yeah.

[Matt Lech]

Or in D.C. it's a fantasy, but it's a fantasy that is going to get thousands of people killed and it's the tragedy of it.

[Emma Vigeland]

Well Seamus, I really appreciate your time today. Thanks so much for coming on and giving us an update here. We'll put a link to your sub stack below. Wherever people are listening to or watching this. Thanks so much. Appreciate your time today.

[Matt Lech]

Thank you.

[Emma Vigeland]

Yep, of course. All right. Well with that we are going to wrap up the free part of this program and head into the fun half. We will take your calls, we will read your IMs. We will be joined shortly by Brandon and Binder. But first, Matt, what's happening on Left Reckoning?

[Matt Lech]

Well, what happened on Left Reckoning was I wasn't there this week but Ben, Ben Burgess did show up for the post game with David and I'm ashamed to say, oh Branco Marcher teach a Bronco march on with David for the first half. So check that out. Patreon.com left directing will have another Sunday show for patrons this weekend all right. Oh, you know, let's plug this to.

[Emma Vigeland]

Sure.

[Matt Lech]

Dan Osborne.

[Emma Vigeland]

Oh, yes, good call.

[Matt Lech]

This is July 26th for folks in Omaha, Nebraska. Connor Oberst of Bright Eyes is going to be there at the Steamfitters Union hall in Omaha. That's a very cool little link up. You know, I might have expected Bright Eyes was a band that all of my, my roommates and stuff in college really loved. And I don't know if, if you're like me, but when everybody else got to something before me, I like can't join in on it as much as I'd want to. But now I'm going to because this is very cool. So Omaha, anybody near Omaha go to that?

[Emma Vigeland]

Definitely, Definitely. I mean, I know we have, we have somebody who sometimes calls into the show who's from Nebraska. Maybe that caller wants to call in, in the fun half, get his thoughts on Dan Osborne and such. All right. We do have Brandon and Binder soon to be joined with me on camera. We'll read some IMs as we get them framed up. Dave from Jamaica said the only option is a nuke. Well, I'm assuming in Iran that domestically that's what they're saying. Number 13, Iran should be openly discussing US regime change. Fair enough. We have these guys a good way.

[Matt Lech]

For them to get nuked.

[Emma Vigeland]

There we go. Hello, hello, hello, hello. Hello, Binder, how are you doing with sleep with baby number three?

[Sam Seder]

I'm doing okay. You know, some nights are better than.

[Emma Vigeland]

Others and that's just hours maybe. Yeah. Was last night okay?

[Sam Seder]

Last night? Was okay. Last night she was, she was good.

[Emma Vigeland]

Good, good, good. You're bringing your best then today, I expect and on your shows. What's happening over there on this show?

[Sam Seder]

Didn't, didn't have a. My usual live stream this week. There it was my, my oldest son Ezra. His 10th birthday yesterday when I usually stream, so. Wow, congratulations. Been doing this for a decade now. It's insane.

[Emma Vigeland]

Happy 10 year, 10 year old birthday. Happy birthday to Ezra.

[Sam Seder]

Thank you. I'll let him know you guys did that. He'll love it. So. Yeah. But here I am. And then tonight leftist [e-mail] Matt Binder. So check it out. And also I'm gonna be officially launching the. My, my newsletter soon, so disruptionist.com go there, sign up, send me your email so I could get, you know, send you this stuff. It's, it's gonna be, it'll be good. I promise. Promise. We will win. Yeah.

[Emma Vigeland]

Yeah, we will win. And we won't Bender won't Rest. Brandon, what's happening on the discourse?

[Sam Seder]

I also slept great. Thanks for asking, Emma. Oh, you're welcome. Well, yesterday we explored the five stages of grief through the reactions of right wing commentators to the Epstein. Whoa. The Epstein disclosure. Disclosure in air quotes by the doj. Epstein. Yeah. Yeah.

[Emma Vigeland]

Who.

[Sam Seder]

Who's that? This guy's been talked about for years. Epstein. Is that with an E or an A? Like, I. I just don't.

[Emma Vigeland]

I.

[Sam Seder]

Anyway, we talked about that.

[Matt Lech]

We, like, we thought of the whole.

[Sam Seder]

Rainbow of reactions that people were having. And then today we kind of did a deep into all of the extreme weather events that are going on around the United States of America and even just like, Globe.

[Emma Vigeland]

All right, check it out, folks. And then I guess we will head into the fun house.

[Sam Seder]

It just seems like a desecration. But you go ahead.

[Emma Vigeland]

It seems like you're a piece of shit that doesn't care about these dead kids. But go ahead. Go ahead. Ahead. Go ahead.

[Sam Seder]

Yeah, I mean, I don't know.

[Emma Vigeland]

It seems like the accusation is Trump.

[Sam Seder]

Cares too much about children. Right? Like, so.

[Emma Vigeland]

I mean, allegedly. And we'll see. It must be in that vault. Well, we'll continue to talk about this. I think in the fun half we have Bill O'Reilly crawled out of his crypt to defend the suppression of the Epstein files. You know what? He just finds common cause with sex criminal animals. That's the thing.

[Matt Lech]

Everybody called aloofa a falafel.

[Emma Vigeland]

Yeah, he wanted to rub that falafel all over his unwilling producer. Anyway, see you in the fun half. Will open up the lines on the other end.

[Matt Lech]

Okay, Emma, please.

[Emma Vigeland]

Well, I just. I feel that my voice is sorely lacking on the Majority report.

[Sam Seder]

Wait, look, Sam is unpopular. I do deserve a vacation at Disney World, so leave. And gentlemen, it is my pleasure to welcome Emma to the show.

[Emma Vigeland]

It is Thursday.

[Matt Lech]

I think you need to take a river, Sam.

[Sam Seder]

Yes, please, sir. I'm.

[Matt Lech]

I'm.

[Emma Vigeland]

I'm going to pause you right there.

[Matt Lech]

Wait, what?

[Sam Seder]

You can't encourage Emma to live like this, and I'll tell you why. Who was offered a tour? Sushi and poker with boys. Tour, sushi and poker. Boys. Who was offered a tour? Yeah, Sushi and poker with boys. What? Twerk sushi and poker.

[Emma Vigeland]

Tim's upset.

[Sam Seder]

Twerk sushi and poker with two boys. He was offered twerk sushi and that's what we call biz. Sushi and bulker with two boys.

[Emma Vigeland]

Right. Twerk sushi and we're gonna get demonetized.

[Sam Seder]

I just think that what you did.

[Matt Lech]

To Tim Pool was mean.

[Emma Vigeland]

Free speech.

[Sam Seder]

That's not what we're about here. Look at how sad he's become now. You shouldn't even talk about him. I think you're right.

[Emma Vigeland]

Responsible. I probably am in a certain way. But let's get to the meltdown here.

[Sam Seder]

Sushi and poker with the boys. Oh, my God. Wow. Sushi. I'm sorry.

[Emma Vigeland]

I'm losing my mind.

[Sam Seder]

Someone's offered with tour. Sushi and poker with Boys Logic. Sushi and poker with. I think I'm like a little kid.

[Emma Vigeland]

I think I'm like a little kid.

[Sam Seder]

Think I'm like a kid.

[Matt Lech]

I think I'm like a little kid. I think I'm like a little kid.

[Sam Seder]

Add this debate seven a thousand times. I'm losing my mind.

[Matt Lech]

Some people just don't understand.

[Sam Seder]

I'm not trying to be a dick right now, but like, I absolutely think.

[Emma Vigeland]

The US should be providing me with.

[Sam Seder]

A wife and kids.

[Emma Vigeland]

That's not what we're talking about here.

[Sam Seder]

It's not a fun job. That's a real thing. That's real thing. Real thing.

[Matt Lech]

Willy Walker. That's a real thing.

[Sam Seder]

That's that offered. That's a real thing. That's real thing. That's a real thing. That's offered to work. Ladies and gentlemen, Joe Rogan has done it again.

[Matt Lech]

That's a real thing.

[Sam Seder]

I think he might be blowing it out proportion. Real thing. That's offered. That's a real thing. Let's go, Joey. Sushi and poke with Boy Take a knee.

[Matt Lech]

It going to work.

[Sam Seder]

Sushi and poker. Things have really gotten out of hand. Sushi and poker with boys.

[Emma Vigeland]

Delusional.

[Sam Seder]

Twerk. Sushi. You don't have a clue as to what's going on live YouTube.

[Emma Vigeland]

Sam has, like, the weight of the.

[Sam Seder]

World on his shoulders.

[Emma Vigeland]

Sam doesn't want to do this show anymore.

[Matt Lech]

Anymore.

[Emma Vigeland]

It was so much easier when the majority report was just you.

[Sam Seder]

Let's change the subject. Rangers and Nick are doing great now.

[Matt Lech]

Shut up.

[Emma Vigeland]

Don't want people saying reckless things on your program.

[Sam Seder]

That's one of the most difficult parts about this show.

[Emma Vigeland]

This is the Pro Killing podcast.

[Sam Seder]

I'm thinking maybe it's time we bury the hatchet.

[Emma Vigeland]

Left his best trump. Violet.

[Sam Seder]

Twerk.

[Matt Lech]

Don't be foolish and don't tweet at me. And don't the way Emma has cucked all of these people love it.

[Emma Vigeland]

That's where my heart is. So I wrote my honors thesis about it. Jesus.

[Matt Lech]

I guess I should hand the main.

[Sam Seder]

Mic to you now. You are to the right of me on foreign policy.

[Emma Vigeland]

We already formed Israel, dude. Are you against us?

[Sam Seder]

That's a tougher question I haven't answered to. Incredible theme song.

[Emma Vigeland]

Hi, bumbler.

[Sam Seder]

Emma Viand.

[Matt Lech]

Absolutely one of my favorite people, actually.

[Sam Seder]

Not just in the game, like, period.