Transcript
Matt Walsh (0:00)
Today Matt Walsh show President Trump launches an attack on Iranian nuclear sites on Saturday night. The next day he mentions the possibility of regime change in Iran. I've made my stance on US Interventionism in the Middle east known. Will I change my position now to keep up with the trends? No, obviously not. I'll give my full take and breakdown of the situation today. Also, Democrats had more important things to worry about, like the fact that J.D. vance called a Democrat lawmaker Jose and the good folks in Canada are always happy to lighten the mood by giving us something to laugh about. They've done it again. Now they're changing their street signs to make them completely unintelligible, all in the name of decolonization. We'll talk about all that and more today on the Matt Walsh did you know that all chips and fries used to be cooked in beef tallow up until the 1990s when big corporations made the switch to cheap, processed seed oils? Today, seed oils now make up a staggering 20% of the average American's daily calories. Recent studies have started linking these oils to metabolic health issues and inflammation throughout the body, which got the folks at Vandy Crisps thinking there had to be a better way. They decided to go back to basics and create a potato chip with just three simple ingredients heirloom potatoes, sea salt and 100% grass fed beef tallow. What makes Vandy different isn't just what they've taken out, but what they put back in that grass fed beef towel isn't just for flavor. It's actually packed with nutrients that are great for your skin, brain and hormones. When you snack on Vandy, you'll notice the difference immediately. Instead of that familiar crash and bloat or sluggish feeling you get from regular chips, you'll feel satisfied, light and energetic. The beef tallow makes these chips incredibly satiating too, so you won't find yourself mindlessly binging through an entire bag and still feeling hungry afterwards. Made 100% in America with zero shortcuts, Vandy represents what snacking should feel like satisfying and guilt free. I've had the chips. I can honestly say that they actually are the best potato chips I've ever had. Period. And I don't give that endorsement lightly, but it is actually true. Perfect crunch, perfect flavor. Ready to give Vandy a try? Go to vandycrisps.com walsh and use code WALSH for 25 off your first order. That's vandycrisps.com Walsh code WALSH for 25 OFF your first order. If you listen to this show and have followed my work over the years. You know that foreign affairs are, to put it mildly, not my area of focus. There are a couple of reasons for that. One of them is that just not that interested in what other countries are doing. The other is that to my mind, focusing intently on the affairs of foreign nations comes with a significant opportunity cost for every hour we spend talking about, for example, the mullahs in Iran who have supposedly been on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons for many years now. We aren't talking about catastrophic threats that directly impact the lives of American citizens every single day. And these are threats that we can easily solve if we choose to do so. To give just one example, yesterday a magistrate judge ruled that Kilmar Abrego Garcia can be released from jail pending his trial. This is the illegal alien and suspected MS.13 gang member whose alleged crimes include human trafficking and wife beating, who Democrats have turned into a hero of their party. And now the Democrats have succeeded in bringing him back here from El Salvador. And if this judge gets her way, he'll be free to roam the streets of Nashville, Tennessee or anywhere else he wants to go. And yet, despite this very direct infringement on our national sovereignty and many, many cases just like it, no bunker buster bombs were dropped on MS.13 Strongholds in Mexico or Central America over the weekend. We haven't sent the military to go destroy the Mexican gangs and cartels that have terrorized this country for too long. Yes, it would clearly advance our interest to eliminate these threats immediately using overwhelming military force, but we haven't done that and there doesn't appear to be any plans to do that. Instead, as you've heard by now, of course, on Saturday, the Trump administration launched a targeted military strike against Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities, which means that for better or worse, Iran is not just a matter of foreign affairs anymore. The United States is involved. And now, very explicitly, the president is also, as of yesterday, talking about regime change in Iran. So here's what he wrote on Sunday, quote, it's not politically correct to use the term regime change, but if the current Iranian regime is unable to make Iran great again, why wouldn't there be a regime change? Mega, mega, I don't know. Make Iran great again is the miga. Now, the defense for that post will be that and has already been that Trump is trolling or that he's saying something extreme as a means to gain an advantage in negotiations, or that he means that the Iranian people should rise up and create their own regime change. And any of those interpretations could be true. But whatever his point, we absolutely cannot get involved in a regime change war. It's not up to the United States to decide what sort of regime rules over Iran. Least of all, is it our job to make Iran great again? The greatness of America is our only concern. Now, of course, I have no doubt that if Trump did decide to launch a war for regime change in Iran, a certain sizable portion of right wing influencers will discover that actually they're big fans of Dick Cheney style foreign policy. After all, we've already seen these pivots happening in certain corners. Now that brings us to the what should be the, the question, which is, did the attack on Iran actually benefit the United States? That is the only question that matters. And any reasonable person has to admit that there are coherent arguments on both sides. Now, the argument in favor of military intervention is that very soon Iran could, they say, build a nuclear weapon. That's according to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabard, who has testified that, quote, Iran can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months if they decide to finalize the assembly. And she also said that in the same sentence, in the same statement, that they have no intelligence indicating that Iran actually is building a nuclear weapon. But she said that they, they could. And this is a country that openly despises the United States, as many Islamic countries do. They've waged proxy wars against us in the Middle east, often through intermediaries. They've launched rockets at our soldiers. The pro intervention crowd says that the Iranian regime is evil and murderous, which of course, it definitely is. As I said last week, the whole regime can go to hell as far as I'm concerned. Many of them already are in hell, you know, no doubt. And, and so that was the argument in favor of military intervention, that this is an evil regime that's responsible for the deaths of Americans and it could build, or maybe is building, depending on who you're listening to, a nuclear weapon. That's the case that was made by that side of the argument. And it's the case that ultimately won out. Clearly, it's also, I think, wrong. There are some serious problems with this line of argument, problems that led me to think that it's a, it's a bad idea for America to get involved. And I still think that. I'm not going to change my position now just because Trump did the thing that I initially opposed. I'm not going to triangulate and try to find whatever position will be the most popular. Right now, as I'm sort of reading the tea leaves. I'm not going to do that. I'm just going to tell you what I think, which is all that I ever do on this show. You know, I can't promise you that I'm always right. I've been wrong about plenty of things. But I can promise you that whatever you hear me say, I'm saying it because I believe it to be true. All I can do is tell you what I believe to be true and the chips will fall where they may from there. So. So what are the problems with the pro intervention argument, the argument that, as already acknowledged, did in fact win the day? Well, first of all, as has been pointed out many times, and rightly so, this is all very eerily similar to the lead up to the Iraq war. It's not exactly the same. It's 20 years later, it's a different country. But the similarities are striking enough to give any thoughtful person a reason for pause. At a minimum, and more importantly, and as was the case with Iraq, when it comes to the question of Iran's nuclear capabilities, we unfortunately have no reason to trust the US Intelligence Agency's assessment one way or another. They've lied so often and so consistently on everything from Iraq to the COVID Lab leak to the fact that they, you know, bomb civilians during the pullout from Afghanistan, that no one can trust them. In fact, even the President United States doesn't seem to trust his own director of National Intelligence. Watch. What intelligence do you have that Iran is building a nuclear weapon? Your intelligence community has said they have no evidence that they are at this point.
