PDB Situation Report | March 29th, 2025: Signal Gate Fallout & Iran’s Hidden Hand in Yemen

Summary

Podcast Summary: The President's Daily Brief Episode: PDB Situation Report | March 29th, 2025: Signal Gate Fallout & Iran’s Hidden Hand in Yemen
Host: Mike Baker
Release Date: March 29, 2025

---

Introduction

In this episode of The President's Daily Brief, host Mike Baker delves into two pressing national security issues: the fallout from the Signal Gate incident and Iran’s covert influence in Yemen through the Houthi movement. With expert guests retired Army Colonel John Mills and Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, the discussion sheds light on vulnerabilities in U.S. communications and the complex geopolitical maneuvers in the Middle East.

Signal Gate: A Communications Blunder

The episode opens with a detailed analysis of the Signal Gate incident, a major communications mishap that compromised sensitive national security information during U.S. strikes against Houthi targets in Yemen.

Key Points:

• Nature of the Breach: High-ranking officials, including the Vice President and Secretary of Defense, were coordinating operations via a private Signal Group chat. An accidental addition of journalist Jeffrey Goldberg exposed critical details about the strikes.

• Operational Security Concerns: The incident has raised alarms about the operational security (opsec) practices at the highest levels of government.

Notable Quotes:

• Mike Baker (00:56): "We're prohibited by law 21+, and conditions apply. Welcome to the PDP Situation Report."

• John Mills (06:13): "I reject. This is pure street theater. They're trying to catch up where number 47 and team have run over them and is 100 miles down the road."

Operational Security and the Use of Commercial Apps

John Mills critically examines the reliance on commercial communication apps like Signal for sensitive government operations, highlighting the inherent risks.

Key Points:

• Presumption of Breach: Mills emphasizes that in cybersecurity, one must always presume a breach, even in high-level communications.

• Critique of NSA-Approved Devices: Mills expresses skepticism about the efficacy of NSA-approved devices, advocating for more robust and secure communication methods.

Notable Quotes:

• John Mills (10:37): "There's been a successful operation, some very high level prattle was exposed by Goldberg. The operation was successful. Everything was after the fact."

• Alireza Jafarzadeh (10:43): "Yeah."

The Role of China and Potential Foreign Intelligence Threats

The conversation shifts to the possibility of foreign intelligence entities, particularly China, targeting U.S. communication platforms to glean information.

Key Points:

• Chinese Cyber Capabilities: Mills discusses China's advanced data analytics and cyber operations aimed at infiltrating U.S. communication systems.

• Vulnerability of Commercial Apps: The use of commercial apps like Signal makes high-level communications susceptible to foreign intelligence exploitation.

Notable Quotes:

• John Mills (17:27): "Commercial products are the trend. There's been many commercial products approved."

Iran’s Influence over the Houthis in Yemen

Alireza Jafarzadeh provides an in-depth look at Iran's strategic support for the Houthi movement in Yemen, drawing parallels to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Key Points:

• Creation and Support of the Houthis: According to Jafarzadeh, the Houthis were established by Tehran and have received extensive training, funding, and strategic guidance.

• Regional Strategy: Iran utilizes the Houthis as proxies to exert influence without direct involvement, a tactic similar to its approach with Hezbollah and other regional actors.

Notable Quotes:

• Alireza Jafarzadeh (30:19): "It's 100%, to be honest with you, because the Houthis, also known as Alsar Allah, were actually a creation of Tehran."

• Alireza Jafarzadeh (35:08): "The Houthis, the way they are would not even exist if it weren't for the Iran regime."

Potential Regime Change in Iran

The discussion turns to the weakening of the Iranian regime and the prospects for regime change, both domestically and regionally.

Key Points:

• Internal Unrest: Jafarzadeh highlights the numerous uprisings within Iran since 2018, signaling significant internal dissent against the regime.

• Declining Regional Influence: The effectiveness of Iran's proxies in regions like Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq has diminished, presenting an opportunity for U.S. and allied actions to undermine Iranian influence.

Notable Quotes:

• Alireza Jafarzadeh (37:42): "This regime is far weaker than they have ever been. And therefore, I think there is a huge opportunity to end all of these threats."

• John Mills (54:25): "The regime is so weak. Their economy is just like nothing is working because the economy is built on corruption."

Conclusion

Mike Baker wraps up the episode by reiterating the critical nature of both the Signal Gate incident and Iran's strategic maneuvers in Yemen. He emphasizes the need for robust operational security measures and a focused international strategy to counteract Iran's influence in the region.

Final Thoughts:

• Operational Improvements: Strengthening communication protocols to prevent future security breaches is imperative.

• Strategic Countermeasures: Implementing maximum pressure policies and supporting internal resistance within Iran are crucial steps toward regional stability and safeguarding U.S. interests.

Notable Quotes:

• Mike Baker (26:08): "CIOs and CISOs, you are not the main thing. You are an enabler to the main thing."

• Mike Baker (55:44): "Well, that is all the time that we have for this week's PDB Situation report. Right. A lot of information there to digest."

---

This episode provides a comprehensive analysis of significant national security challenges, blending expert insights with actionable conclusions to inform listeners about the complexities of modern geopolitical threats.

Transcript

[Ryan Reynolds]

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Fiscally responsible financial geniuses, monetary magicians. These are things people say about drivers who switch their car insurance to Progressive and save hundreds. Visit progressive.com to see if you could save Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states or situations.

[Unknown Advertiser]

Step into the world of power, loyalty, and luck.

[Mike Baker]

I'm gonna make him an offer he.

[Unknown Advertiser]

Can'T refuse with family. Cannolis and spins mean everything.

[Mike Baker]

Now you want to get mixed up in the family business.

[Unknown Advertiser]

Introducing the [e-mail] test your luck on the shadowy world of the Godfather slots.

[Mike Baker]

Someday I will call upon you to do a service for me.

[Unknown Advertiser]

Play the godfather [e-mail] welcome to the family. No purchase necessary. VGW Group void.

[Mike Baker]

We're prohibited by law 21+, and conditions apply. Welcome to the PDP Situation Report. I'm Mike Baker, your eyes and ears on the world stage. All right, let's get ourselves briefed. We're starting today's show with the latest on Signal Gate. You knew it had to have a catchy name. That's the stunning blunder that exposed sensitive national security chatter during the early strikes against the Houthis. Retired Army Colonel John Mills, former director of cybersecurity policy at the Pentagon, will join us to break that all down later in the show. US Strikes on the Houthis are ramping up. But how much of this fight is actually being run out of Tehran now? Alireza Jafar, deputy director of the Washington office for the National Council of Resistance of Iran. Can't put that on a bumper sticker. Well, he says Iran's regime is pulling the strings. He joins us with the evidence. But first, today's situation report. Spotlight. The Trump administration is facing serious questions after a major communications blunder now known as Signal Gate. During the early stages of US Strikes on Houthi targets in Yemen, senior national security officials, and there were a lot of them, including the vice president and Secretary of Defense, were coordinating in a private Signal Group chat. Now, if you don't know what Signal is, it's a commercial app. It's considered to be somewhat secure and discreet, certainly more so than an open line. Unfortunately, during the course of this chat, someone mistakenly added the editor in chief of the Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg. Okay, enter a journalist. Sets of details about the strikes, including targets and timing, were shared before the mistake was caught. The incident, as you might imagine, has sparked concerns about operational security, what we would call opsec and discipline at the highest levels Joining us now is retired Army Colonel John Mills, former director of cybersecurity policy at the Department of Defense. Perfect guy to talk to about Signal Gate. Now you can check him out on substack at Colonel Rhett. John, you can also grab his excellent book and that's called War against the Deep State. If you don't already have it on your shelf, go out and get it. All right. If there's a bookstore near you, I don't know if we still have bookstores. John, welcome to the show, man.

[John Mills]

Hey, Mike, Always an honor to be on this show with you. Thank you so much.

[Mike Baker]

That's very kind of you to say. I, I would like you, if you wouldn't mind, to write that down and, and send it as a note to my producers. Tell me what you think about Signal Gate.

[John Mills]

Well, I don't attach the word gate to it. I was, I was one of the key people who had to deal with Hillary Clinton. And it wasn't just Hillary. It was a pervasive, intentional criminal RICO effort by the entire Obama team, Obama Biden team to evade the Government Records act and use their personal cell phones. And actually when they were doing it, even there was early instant messaging inside behind the firewall that, hey, guess what? We weren't capturing that as part of the Government Records Act. So this was intentional and pervasive. They were intentionally trying to get around the Government Records Act. It was a criminal conspiracy. Okay. And as opposed to this, and I'll go into a lot of detail and enumerated elements, but as opposed to this situation where we had a successful operation, some very high level prattle was, was exposed by Goldberg. The operation was successful. Everything was after the fact. I've had to deal with a number of spills or supposed spills. Everything I've seen so far, nothing amounts to a classified spill. So I, I reject. This is pure street theater. They, in their, in their attempt to catch up where number 47 and team have run over them and is 100 miles down the road and they're still trying to figure out what happened. They, they, they're trying to. We got them this time. Well, if they're going to die on this hill, they need to pace themselves. There's going to be a lot more hills to die on. And I mean this. And you know, Norm Eisen, the. Was it. Was it Norm Eisen, he is the most craven lunatic out there. He wrote. I was at the NSC in 2009 when he wrote the handling of classified information. And this is the one he rolled out in 2023. I got him. I knew, I knew we were going to get Trump in 2009. So I wrote that executive order on handling your classified information. A norm. You need to read your own executive order. It says, guess what? Who is the ultimate arbitrator of classified what is and what isn't classified according to his own executive order? It's the President.

[Ryan Reynolds]

Yeah.

[Mike Baker]

Now that's a, that's a good point. Right, let's, let's break that down just for a second. Explain to our folks here at the Situation Report who does have the ability to determine classification. It can't just be the president. So who else has that responsibility or that authority to determine what is and isn't classified?

[John Mills]

Well, I mean, I don't, I, I don't mean to be a policy wonk and all those who want to, you know, throw policy on the floor and roll around in it. I mean, but this is, it's the originator. It's the originator. And then you're supposed to have a class. Anytime you have an operation, a program, you're supposed to write a classification guidance manual on what is and what isn't classified. If you want to do the most unfun boring thing in the world, it's writing a classification guidance manual. Okay, it's stupid, but you got to do it. And, but it's in the end, boiling it down. And simply the President, and this one was dealing directly with the President. And President Trump has always says, yep, we could have done better, we're going to do better next time. It was a successful operation. Whatever got out got out after the fact. And again, you know, Goldberg is an absolute craven hack who made up a lie about suckers and losers. And he's making this like he has uncovered the greatest conspiracy ever, you know, since he helped also work with the Russia hoax. So, I mean, no credibility on this guy. Everything I've read. Yeah, right. Doesn't amount to legal, classified information.

[Mike Baker]

Now, when you say after the fact, I mean, I think we learned it after the fact. Right, but to what degree? From your perspective, and you've been dealing with this sort of thing for a long time, could it have been an issue? Look, the Chinese in particular, right, they are extremely well resourced, extremely capable, and extremely motivated to understand what the White House is doing at any given moment. So what would be the potential for them to target or other state actors, or, you know, semi state actors to target signal or other similar commercial apps?

[John Mills]

Well, of course. And of course they are. And there's already Been a follow on story that, it's funny, hasn't really gotten a whole lot of information that they. Somebody has already leaked. You know, kind of the personal, you know, password lists and things like that. For several of the officials, of course that's the highest priority for foreign intelligence. I mean, duh. And you know, do we do it also? All. All I will say is maybe so.

[Mike Baker]

Oh, how toy are you? Hey, okay, but here's. I guess this is where I'm going with this. Look, what we're seeing right now is, is, as you've pointed out is, is typical Washington gamesmanship. Right. So. So the Democrats see this, they haven't had any oxygen since November, nothing to cheer about. So they get a hold of this and of course that's what they're going to do. They're going to rust to the cameras. They're going to say this is the biggest security breach they've ever seen. Absolute. Chuck Schumer said. And by the way, don't get between a camera and Chuck Schumer. It's a very dangerous place to be. And they'll talk about how know this is the sky is falling and on the other side this is, you know, again, what happens in Washington. The other side being the Republicans in this instance, you know, are downplaying it. Nothing to see here. Wasn't classified. N you know that it's. It's all over, folks taking all that and pushing it to the side. Meaning the partisan politics from an operational perspective.

[John Mills]

Do you think it's a problem on the scale of. Come on, you know, from your time in the company that you gotta, you gotta do a risk assessment here and you know, really, how bad was this on the spectrum of. And again from what I've seen.

[Mike Baker]

But I guess what I'm asking is, is it a problem in terms of the. The highest level officials working in highly classified positions dealing on a regular basis with highly classified material? Apparently okay with the idea of using the commercial available app rather than their NSA approved and provided devices or other more secure methods to communicate with each other.

[John Mills]

Yeah. Please don't get me going on NSA approved devices. You got to be kidding me. You know.

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

Yeah.

[John Mills]

If you want yesterday's salute, yesterday's product delivered tomorrow. Yes, we'll go to NSA approved solutions. Okay.

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

But you have to admit, John, I'm.

[Mike Baker]

Just playing devil's advocate here. Right? And all the time, I'm not talking about. I don't give a crap about the politics of it from one side or the other. I'm simply saying you Know, there are standard, more secure ways to communicate when you're in those positions. And the potential is there for hostile actors whom we know are regularly targeting or attempting to target, you know, key personnel and trying to capture conversation and understand plans and intentions. You know, from that perspective, I mean, what's, what's your impression? What I. Again, push aside politics of it all. Is this something you would have done?

[John Mills]

Yeah, absolutely. The, the trend is absolutely use of commercial products. And that's including behind the firewall. Including for now. Again, there's different, there's different levels. Unclassified, we still are behind a firewall. When you do unclassified, the. Then the intelligence community rejects this concept of secret, so they just jump to the top secret and compartmented. But the Department of Defense still call something secret. So we have unclassified networks which are still behind the firewall. You have secret. And then for the super double top secret people pretending that nobody's ever listening to them when everything has been broken into anyway, you got the top secret. Okay, so it's, it's utterly ridiculous and a charade. But the trend is, is commercial product. There's been. Well, I believe the DNI and both John Ratcliffe both said this was an approved product. Now it really is an NSA. NSA. The DNI, which supposedly. NSA, which supposedly works for the DNI. Yes, they are essentially. I think it's NSPD 38. They're essentially in charge of the top secret networks and they farm out J WIX to the bottom feeders at DIA to manage. But yeah, this was an approved product and we used many approved products behind the firewall, so. And a lot of these commercial solutions are good. The basic concept with cyber security, though, is also you have to presume breach even at the highest levels of supposedly. Again, I'm, I'm just, I'm not releasing anything classified here. I'm just saying you have to presume breach at all times. So. But let me give you the vignette of, of the high value targeting process with General Stan McChrystal, because before you do that.

[Mike Baker]

Hold on to that thought because I want to. I want to kick off our second segment with what you're about to do, but before you do that, I need you to stay put, please.

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

You know what?

[Mike Baker]

Let me be more polite about that. Don't go anywhere. Stay put. It's like I'm talking to Hendrix, my golden retriever, if you stay right where you are. We got to take a quick break, and then we're going to be back with more of THE Situation Report.

[Unknown Advertiser]

This episode is brought to you by Universal Pictures. Today's the day. From Universal Pictures and Blumhouse come a storm of terror. From the director of the Shallows. The Woman in the Yard. Don't let her in. Where does she come from? What does she want? When will she leave? The Woman in the Yard in theaters now.

Your data is like gold to hackers. They're selling your passwords, bank details and private messages. McAfee helps stop them. Secure VPN keeps your online activity private. AI powered text scam detector spots phishing attempts instantly. And with award winning antivirus, you get top tier hacker protection. Plus you'll get up to $2 million in identity theft coverage. All for just $39.99 for your first year. Visit McAfee.com, cancel anytime terms apply.

[Ryan Reynolds]

Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile with a message for everyone paying big wireless way too much. Please, for the love of everything good in this world, stop with Mint. You can get premium wireless for just $15 a month. Of course, if you enjoy overpaying, no judgments. But that's weird. Okay, one judgment anyway. Give it a [e-mail] Switch upfront payment.

[Unknown Advertiser]

Of $45 for 3 month plan equivalent to $15 per month required intro months only. Then full price plan options available, taxes and fees extra. See full terms@mint mobile.com welcome back to.

[Mike Baker]

The PDB Situation Report. Joining me once again is the excellent friend of the show, retired army colonel John Mills. John, thanks for sticking around. And you were about in our previous segment you were about to go into a vignette. Please carry on.

[John Mills]

Well I think this is, this really explains a lot of this into you know, you've, you want to you know. Yes, it's a political haymaking exercise on people like Schiff and Swallow who've been absolute liars. A Swalwell who was sleeping with a foreign agent and still has access to top secret information for some reason. But the so the high value targeting process was a very successful process used by Stan Crystal and an interagency JSOC led team to to really well some actually take that back sometimes it was under a DSS and the triple S to CIA is the lead but extremely successful process. Okay and he he's talked about in open forums on a number of occasions and he's been asked a number of times I've asked him on a number also is so what happens if any of this information gets out on what you did and you know what his response was essentially words the exact effect couldn't care less. Why? Because I'm already 10 miles down the road on my fifth subsequent operation. Who cares if it gets out? Because if some bad person is reading this, it may be the last thing they're doing before they're filled with lead or go to pieces. I mean this is, listen, it's, it's all about. There's two key concepts. The velocity of operations in the modern era. It's always you've got to outpace, you've got to be so far ahead. Just like number 47 is so far ahead of the opposition. You got to always be way down the road. So what if this gets out there by the time they make sense out of it, I mean you've already run over them 20 times. Who cares?

[Mike Baker]

Unless, Unless of course this system is compromised for the long term. Right. I mean there, there is a potential for systems I could like a signal now to, you know. To be compromised for the long term.

[John Mills]

Yeah. Again, commercial products are the trend. There's many commercial products approved. Okay. And behind the fight for use behind the firewall, many. So I mean we got to get past that. Now this was, I think you brought up an important point. Everything, all roads lead to China. This is a Chinese integrated operation. The Houthis are part of the Chinese led operation at top America. China has the, the Ministry of State, State Security and their, and their, their integrated cyber operation. They copy, they copy us, they learn, they do everything we do, they copy it and they play it right back at us. So their big data, their big data analytics are pretty ferocious with none of the legal guardrails that we supposedly have. They don't, we don't have them if they're. You have an R behind your name. But the. So, so yeah but again velocity, Velocity, velocity. So the Chinese have a ferocious data analytics, a ferocious big data which they've essentially a big, big collection system. And look at the. Well, don't look at them. I'm not allowed to look at them. But look at the, all the files that Snowden, A guy who passed his polygraph, let me remind everybody, guy who passed it multiple times his full scope poly. Interesting. That's another issue. So look at the documents they read.

[Mike Baker]

Well I mean if you don't have a sense of, if you don't have a sense of right or wrong, you can pass the polygraph.

[John Mills]

Isn't that interesting? I'm going, I'm about a good friend of mine say save Christian is, is dealing with multiple no go's on his polygraph. Isn't that Interesting. They catch. They catch saved evangelical Christians, but they don't save, you know, what was it? Reality? Winner, nsa. Georgia didn't catch her. Yeah. Didn't get snowed and didn't catch a bunch of people. Oh, yo, you know, who's the who?

[Mike Baker]

You don't catch. You don't get people. You know, the, The. The moles, for instance, right, are counterintelligence cases. You know, whether it's Hanson or Ed Lee Howard or. Or Aldrich James or any of them. You know, you can. You can argue that. That a psychopath who doesn't really care about right and wrong. You know, that's what you. That.

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

That.

[Mike Baker]

That's what you're playing off of. Right. You're. The polygraph is definitely. It's not a complete science.

[John Mills]

Polygraph consumes an enormous amount of our counterintelligence resource, nor.

[Mike Baker]

Absolutely. Yeah. So absolutely.

[John Mills]

I think we need to invert that whole model that should be used on an exception basis in very targeted situations. But it's.

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

It.

[John Mills]

It consumes. If you. If people would see the budget books, which they're not supposed to see because they're classified. It consumes an enormous amount of resources that just. Look, look how many that. This, this one CIA officer recently who. The Biden team was just chewing off a leg of Israel. Give us your war plans against Iran. And they got him in. 30 seconds later, Iran had him because a CIA officer who was fully, you know, gave him. You know, there you go.

[Mike Baker]

Yeah, yeah. But anyway, that's the. That's the problem. That's why counterintelligence is. Is so difficult not to disappear down that rabbit hole in this conversation. But that's why it's so difficult. Right. It's a human endeavor, and, and you know, you're always going to have the potential for a breach in that regard. And that's. That's a. That's a human breach as opposed to what we've been talking about, which is the potential to compromise technical solutions, whether it's signal or anything else. Well, but, John, let me ask you this. I know. I know what I. You know, what you've said about this, and I don't disagree in terms of. Look, obviously, you know, there are apps that are available. Clearly, this wasn't the first time this. This group or individuals in this group have used signal to communicate with each other. I think it would be completely odd if this was the very first time they've ever done it. What would be your advice if you were, you know, in there and, you know, would you Go and say, okay, let's, let's wrap this up. You know, here's, here's a different app you can use or, or are you not concerned with a continuing use of, of an app like Signal? And I, again, I know I take your point. I know what you're saying that some of these are approved. I think the Defense Department had issued some concern about Signal in the past, but I don't know where that ended up.

[John Mills]

Bottom line, if there, if there has, and I, and I know I said spoke ill of our NSA brothers, please forgive me and stop surveilling me, but if there is a modicum of a check, it's approved. Again, you have to presume breach even on the higher level networks. Now I'm not going to, I'm not going to say yes or no whether we've been breached on there, etc. You have to presume breach. It's velocity, velocity, Velocity in the modern era of the operations. And okay, you know, now I also, I wrote a substack piece on this that contained many enumerated points. You know, one of them is because at first, when I first wrote this, I wasn't clear on whether Signal was, was, was this their personal signal or was this signal approved and behind the firewall, which on the unclass can still reach out to the general public beyond the doc mill, the.gov, etc. Okay, so it appears it was behind the firewall and they had Nordberg's. No, Goldberg's, you know, telephone number. Okay, oops. But you know, but that also I wrote a piece on that because you know, contact lists are complex databases and they can, even, even without malicious behavior, they can become confused. The databases can become confused, especially when you're using them across multiple platforms. Guess what? Even without malicious behavior, they can start transferring data and messing up contact lists and the, and you know, man, honestly.

[Mike Baker]

I think, I think a lot of people out there in the general population that have had that experience, right? I mean you hear that on a somewhat regular basis how that that happens. So from your perspective, is it more of a concern of speed of communication? Is it ease of communication? Because I've, I've read a number of things now. There's a lot of people out there that are, that are trying to make their way through what happened. And I think there's a number of folks that are saying, well yes, it's understandable because the, you know, the sort of, the high side, the secure comms for those most secure conversations are cumbersome or you know, it's not easy, right? And so the tendency is, let's go with something easy. And we see that again in when you're talking about security protocols at large corporations, right? If you layer on too much security, people are going to eventually bypass it because they need to get their work done.

[John Mills]

I was brought into the Cyber World in 2006 by my NSA boss. I didn't work for NSA, but you know, he needed a planner. He didn't need a career IT person who had knuckle dragger, had spent all their life connecting and disconnecting cables. I mean, he needed a plan, he needed a planner to be the senior Department of Defense representative to the interagency program called the Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative. And so we learned a lot, a lot of things in that. But we learned about offense, we learned about defense. But again, velocity is important and you've got you. That you, what you brought up several times is so important if you are doing so good in security that everything is just so clamped down that you know. Oh boy. No, well, you know, and let's not even talk about people using end arounds just to try to accomplish the mission. Well, if you got it so clamped down that it's so complex to do anything, well, guess what? The enemy's accomplishing their objectives anyway because they've shut you down. So, and that's a, this is a hard thing for the career CIO or cis, Chief Information Officer or Chief Information Security Officer to, to get their heads around because they're gonna. We're coming up with a perfect olution. Remember, remember CIOs and CISOs, you are not the main thing. You are an enabler to the main thing. So you do have to consider ease of use. Because what you do is if you make it so difficult, either people are not getting anything done or people are going around and creating the opportunities, then.

[Mike Baker]

The other side is one again because, right, you're looking for people who are breaching established security protocols. If you're a hostile element, you know, whether it's state or non state actors. John, this is. I, I would love to continue this conversation because you're always fascinating and you know, you, you've lived in this world for so long that it's refreshing because it's important for people to again, to, to step back and actually hear what I would, you know, and have referred to as sort of the operational aspects of this rather than the, the political side of it. Because again, we're so used to, to Washington D.C. regardless of who's in charge, regardless of which administration it is. You're always going to get this right. And I've listened to Schiff and I've listened to Chuck Schumer and the others rushing to the cameras and saying, you know, everybody's got to go. This is horrible. And then, you know, on the other side, again, there's some downplaying. But I'm really appreciative of you coming on here and kind of walking us through the operational aspects of this so people can get, you know, a, what I think is more of a nonpartisan view on this to make their own determination as to where this all, you know, goes. But thank you again, John, and I hope you'll, you'll come back next time we call you on the phone. Coming up next, as US Strikes against the Houthis intensify, is Iran really calling the shots? It's an important question and we've got a great person here to, to talk about it. That would be Alireza Jafarzadeh. He says yes, and he's got the evidence to prove it. He'll join us when we come back.

[Unknown Advertiser]

This episode is brought to you by Shopify. Forget the frustration of picking commerce platforms when you switch your business to Shopify, the global commerce platform that supercharges your selling. Wherever you sell. With Shopify, you'll harness the same intuitive features, trusted apps and powerful analytics used by the world's leading brands. Sign up today for your $1 per month trial period at shopify.com tech, all lowercase. That's shopify.com tech.

The new KFC Dunk It Bucket with juicy original recipe tenders, new mashed potato poppers, crispy fries, plus three sauces that fit right on top of the lid. So you can dunk anywhere. You can dunk at the game, dunk while security points to the no outside food sign. And dunk as 20,000 people watch you and your Dunkit bucket get removed from the stadium. Dunk almost anywhere with the new $7 KFC Dunkit Bucket or get the Double Dunkit Bucket for 25. Prices and participation vary while supplies last.

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

Taxes, tips and fees extra like a.

[Josh Hammer]

Bull in a china shop. Donald Trump came in to drain the swamp in Washington, D.C. but with his bold reform and rejuvenation agenda comes so many legal questions nationwide. Injunctions, Are they constitutional? What's the deal with birthright citizenship? What about the administrative state? Can he actually clean the deep state and end the politicization of the federal bureaucracy? I'm Josh Hammer, host of America on Trial with Josh Hammer. Subscribe to America on Trial with Josh Hammer for your daily updates on all of these questions and more.

[Mike Baker]

Welcome back to THE BDB Situation report. The US Military campaign against the Houthis is entering its second week with strikes continuing to target missile launch sites, radar systems and and the group's leadership across Yemen. Now the Trump administration says the goal is to degrade the Houthis ability to threaten international shipping in the Red Sea. But there's a bigger question at play. How much of this Houthi aggression is actually being directed by the Iranian regime? Is Tehran using the Houthis as a proxy to escalate tensions without getting its hands dirty? Joining us now is Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran. Alireza, thank you very much for coming on with THE SITUATION report. I really appreciate you.

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

Thank you so much. Always a pleasure.

[Mike Baker]

Mike, let's start from sort of the top line. Talk to me about what you perceive here. To what degree does the Iranian regime drive the actions, the strategic thinking, planning and activities of the Houthis?

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

It's 100%, to be honest with you, because the Houthis, also known as Alsar Allah, were actually a creation of Tehran. There were no Houthis some 25 years ago. And the father, Badreddin, along with two sons, Hossein and Abdul Malik, they went to Iran to qm, where they, you know, the religious schools are there near Tehran. And they spent at least one year in Qom getting all kinds of trainings from then and then came back to to Yemen. First started as a sort of like a benign looking movement. They even participated in some parliamentary elections. And since 2004, the order came that now is the time and they got engaged into major confrontations with the central government there. And since then, what is now known as the Houthis has become a creation of Tehran both in terms of arming, sponsoring funding, providing guidance, intelligence, all kinds of training provided to them. And that's why, I mean, similar to Hezbollah in Lebanon, I would say this is like the parallel version of Hezbollah. And the names are pretty similar, Ansar Allah and Hezbollah. And their area of operation obviously is in Yemen, but they get a lot of their trainings not necessarily in Yemen or not even not necessarily in Tehran or Iranian cities. Rather, some of that is provided to them in Lebanon or was provided to them in Lebanon by Hezbollah. Also, some of the trainings took place in Najaf by the Iran regime's proxies, the hashtag Shabi and others.

[Mike Baker]

You Mentioned something interesting in 2004. You said that the, the group shifted from sort of a benign or semi benign political entity or taking part in elections etc, to the group that we now know. What was the, what was the motivation, what was happening in 2004 that caused that shift?

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

Well, I think the, what the regime was doing was basically nurturing them in the beginning because they had no real foundation, they were, they had no real support there. So they wanted to, and give them some kind of a footing there and then gradually in this process turn them into an anti American entity. That's how, that's the model they use in, in Lebanon and you know, in other places around the world. But also at the same time Tehran felt that, you know, the, the outside world is really not responding to the regime's terrorism. They have a pretty much free ready to go. You know, in Iraq they had their, you know, in 2003 was the invasion and then they had, they managed, the regime managed to build an extensive structure in Iraq that within few years they were pretty much dominating. And you may recall that the, in Iraq, the number one killer of American forces were what they call the EFPs, explosive form projectiles or penetrators that penetrates through armor. And you know, I worked with Fox and we did a special in 2007, I think about how these EFVs were being produced into Iran and by the old force shipped across the border targeting the Americans and they were getting nothing in response. So the regime felt, okay, now we can get on the offenses because we're not getting any kind of, you know, we're not paying a price for it, so why not? And that's why the order came to turn them into a more active anti American entity.

[Mike Baker]

Okay, so you, you're not buying. Because in recent weeks, as an example, right, there's been some, some attempts by the Iranian regime to say, hey, we, you know, we don't tell them what to do. You know, we don't have any say over their actions. In part responding to what they're seeing from the White House, which is, you know, President Trump saying that he's going to hold the Iranian regime accountable if the Houthis continue with their current course of action. So. But you're not buying that from the Iranian regime?

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

Absolutely not, Mike. You know, the, the Houthis, the way they are would not even exist if it weren't for the Iran regime. The level of training, you know, three years ago we put out a report and held a press conference right here in Washington detailing how the Iran regime had taken some of the Houthis to Iran near the Caspian Sea in a training camp to create what they call the, you know, naval terrorist group that they were. They would be able to carry out terrorist attacks in the sea. And they trained them for several months, at least six months, in near Ramsar, in the.

[Mike Baker]

Near.

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

The. In the Caspian Sea, in Tehran, and they send them back. So when you see those attacks by the Houthis taking place at the Red Sea and also other targets, none of that would have happened without direct training, planning, intelligence, weapons, all of that coming from Tehran. And it's, you know, this is like the regular playbook of Tehran. They always deny all of that. They took hostages in Lebanon in the 80s and 90s. They said, you know, it wasn't us, but we can help you release those hostages. And then they get into negotiations and get money and resources and concessions in order to have the hostages released. In all of those cases, the regime denies. Look at Syria. You know, the regime had spent at least 100,000 of their forces there, including at least 20,000 Hezbollah, in order to keep Assad in power. At least $50 billion was spent, and they considered Syria, Assad in Syria as a strategic debt. But when the time came and the whole thing collapsed in 11 days, thanks to the very weakening position of the regime in the region, then they said, well, you know, it wasn't us. You know, it was another country, and, you know, too bad. And they say the same thing about Hezbollah and all of the others. They said they're, you know, they're acting on their own, which in fact, they aren't.

[Mike Baker]

To what degree do you think the Iranian regime, the current regime, has been damaged or weakened, lost influence as a result of the efforts against Hezbollah, of Hamas? And to what degree do you think there can be success against the Houthis? Along those same lines, there is a.

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

Whole new reality in the region, but also inside Iran. And I think these two elements are intertwined because the regime started getting weaker and weaker inside Iran. Since 2018, where those uprisings started, there have been nine rounds of major uprisings in Iran in all 31 provinces, shaking the very foundation of the regime. People calling for change, calling for an end to the rule of clerics. There were, you know, what they called resistance units formed inside Iran, run by the main Iranian opposition, the mek, that were targeting the Revolutionary Guards and, you know, centers of power. And then in parallel in the region, the regimes that, you know, that. That image of invincibility that Tehran had built over the years that has been badly shattered. Who would think that a regime in Damascus that Tehran tried for about three, four years tried to keep Assad in power with a huge amount of money and resources, but also bringing Russia to help them, that whole thing would fall in 11 days. And the same situation with Hezbollah in Lebanon. And look at the situation in Iraq and now the Houthis. This regime is far weaker than they have ever been. And this is not a small thing. This is not a sideshow. All of these proxies of the regime represented what Khamenei described as the strategic depth. That's what they mean, meaning that if we don't fight and in Lebanon, in Iraq and Syria, other places, we would have to fight in Tehran to keep the regime in power. Those are actually almost similar exact words that Khamenei used. And now all of that is happening. So this regime is far weaker than they have ever been. And therefore, I think there is a huge opportunity to end all of these threats. And of course, the nothing will be resolved unless the mollahs are overthrown and of course, by the people of Iran and the organized resistance.

[Mike Baker]

Okay, well on that note, and we're going to pick it up right there after our break. But Alireza, if you could stay right there. We are going to take a quick break and then we'll be back with more of THE Situation report.

[Josh Hammer]

Like a bull in a china shop, Donald Trump came in to drain the swamp in Washington, D.C. but with his bold reform and rejuvenation agenda comes so many legal questions nationwide. Injunctions, Are they constitutional? What's the deal with birthright citizenship? What about the administrative state? Can he actually clean the deep state and end the politicization of the federal bureaucracy? I'm Josh Hammer, host of America on Trial with Josh Hammer. Subscribe to America on Trial with Josh Hammer for your daily updates on all of these questions and more.

[Mike Slater]

Hey, I'm Mike Slater. I have a podcast called Politics by Faith. We have a very simple mission. We take the news of the day and we filter it through a biblical worldview. So here's the big story of the day. What does the Bible say about it and how can we apply it? It's amazing. There's nothing new under the sun. The Bible has something to say about everything that's going on today. So basically we thump the Bible over on Politics by Faith. I think we got to keep MAGA going. And I think the way to take it beyond just a political victory into a true rebuilding and awakening and revival in America is to make sure. That this is all grounded in biblical principles. And that's what we do on the podcast Politics by Faith. And you can subscribe to Politics by Faith wherever you're listening to the show right now.

[Mike Baker]

Welcome back to the Situation Report. Joining me once again is Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran. Alireza, when we wrapped up the, the first segment, you, you mentioned that nothing really will change until somehow the mullahs are moved out and there's, there's a regime change essentially, is what we're talking about. So, so how does that happen? What do you think that looks like? And, and is there, is there a realistic timeline? Because people have been anticipating or thinking that that could happen or hoping that that could happen for a fairly long time now.

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

Well, you know, the good thing. But what's different now? I know the mullahs have been power, in power for 40 plus years and that's what they use to actually build this perception in the minds of others that, you know, we're the permanent feature here. We're going to be around and all the bitters has always been like that. It will always be like this. You better find a way of living with our terrorism and all of that. That's the thinking of the mullahs. And I think we need to put an end to that because you have never seen this level of weakness of the regime in the region. But also the uprisings inside the country. What the world saw in the past few months or the past year, they saw that the head of the snake of war and terror lies in Tehran. But also the solution is also there. Nothing will be resolved unless the mullahs are overthrown. Now what the benefit the regime had over the years was that they always managed to get concessions for their terrorism. And terrorism became a very profitable, you know, business for, for the ayatollahs, combining the export of terrorism with the hostage taking, you know, taking few houses. You remember back in the, you know, 80s, the Terry Anderson and all the Americas and foreign, other nations that were taken hostage by Tehran. And they always got something for it. They never paid the price for it. They've developed nuclear weapons. You know, we were first to expose the nuclear sites of the regime right here in Washington in August of 2002. I revealed the nuclear sites in Natanz and the heavy weather facility in Iraq near Tehran. And then in a matter of a year, we revealed several other nuclear sites of Iran. And we showed a complete picture of the nuclear weapons program of the regime, even though they were in early stages.

[Mike Baker]

With the nuclear program. What's your perception? Where are they right now with their nuclear weapons development? And how do you, how do you view the current US Administration's perspective on this? They've said they will not get a nuclear weapon. But what does that mean in your mind?

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

I mean, you know, you can talk about these. I know Washington and other capital have been talking about this. But what we know on the ground, from our information on the ground, it shows that they have a very advanced, sophisticated nuclear weapons program that is working on all levels, both in terms of the fissile material, that you can get it from enriched uranium or plutonium. They are working on the weaponization part, which has been very little overseeing on that. The IA is pretty much doing nothing about the weaponization part and then the delivery system, you know, building the missiles to carry the. The nuclear warheads. We just had two press conferences within the past four months showing that the, the main organization in charge of building the nuclear bomb, known as Satan SPND, which we first exposed in July 2011, and three years later it was sanctioned by the US government. That entity is heavily involved in developing nuclear warheads in Sebnan and Sharu, but also into Iran. So, you know, whether the Khamenei decided to put all these pieces together and build a bomb, that's a different issue. We shouldn't get ourselves involved with that. We should look at the realities on the ground. It's not about their decision, it's about what they're doing. This program, since day one has always been about developing nuclear weapons. It's not about energy. And now they're moving towards that direction. But getting back to your first question about how to bring about change in Iran, you know change is going to happen. You need to have several elements. First, the population has to be in a situation to reject the regime which is already there. Since 2018, as I mentioned, there have been nine rounds of major uprisings. It's not really the intellectuals anymore. It's the poor, the deprived, the smaller towns and cities who used to be the bedrock of support for the regime, who are now involved in the protest. Second, you need to have the organized opposition to move things forward, to turn that discontent into change. And that's what those resistance units are doing on the ground around the clock. At least an average of 7 acts of resistance are doing a day in Iran. Not much is being reported in the media. And third is with the role of the outside world, is the outside world helping the regime in maintaining power or they're holding them accountable and squeezing them. This is the missing part. Over the past few years, different administrations, whether it was in Washington and Europe, always gave them concessions. Now is the time to reverse that. And you will see the impact if the maximum pressure policy is fully implemented. And what I mean by maximum pressure, you need to squeeze them where they actually feel it. And the most important element, in addition to the sanctions, is the organized opposition. US should recognize the right of the people of Iran to stand up against the regime, overthrow them, recognize the right of those resistance units to confront the Revolutionary Guards, and you will see the.

[Mike Baker]

Outcome in real terms. What does that recognition look like? Are you talking about material support to those organizations or just moral support? What are you thinking?

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

Well, good question. You know, that question was posed to Mrs. Mario Rajevoulis's movement. She was at the hearing just last month before the US Congress and the members of Congress asked her, what do you want from the United States? And she said, let me tell you what we don't want from the United States. There's no need for boots on the ground. There's no need for arms or appropriating money. None of that is needed. Just recognize the right of the people to stand up against the repressive rulers. Definitely this means moral support, but also it means creating space for those who want to overthrow the regime. Let me just give you one example. In 2002, when we exposed the nuclear sites, within a year we had several major press conferences against the regime. And the regime was just going nuts. So they put pressure on the State department and the U.S. government. You know what happened? Instead of us being at least recognized for what we were doing, they shut down our office in Washington and they designated, they added this movement to the FTO list. We had to fight for 15 years to go to different courts to get members of Congress who get off the list. Why would you want to waste the time and energy and resources of a movement that is trying to overthrow the biggest enemy of humanity today? That's what I mean, you know, when it comes to maximum pressure, when it comes to recognizing their rights to confront the regime, those who are fighting the regime are not terrorists. They are true freedom fighters who want to bring about change in Iran. And Mike, think about an Iran that is free, that is non belligerent, that is seeking peace and seeking a republic form of government. That vote of the people would count. What a difference it will make in the whole region, What a difference it would make in Iraq, in Lebanon. You mentioned all of the countries in the region, but also globally in the world. And that's why I think this is the opportunity for the United States, but also Europe, to line up all their vectors behind these new realities on the ground.

[Mike Baker]

And I think there are regional actors, right, who would not be sad to see the current Iranian regime go away. Right? And so let me ask you this, and maybe you. You don't want to answer, but to what degree are some of those actors, some of those states out there that are, you know, not inclined to support the mullahs? Do they have a relationship in any way with the resistance within Iran? I mean, is there any moral support or any effort from the regional players who could benefit from a more peaceful, stable Iran?

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

Well, Mike, honestly, so far in the past few decades, the terrorism of the Iran regime was very beneficial to them because in a way, in addition to taking hostages and getting money for it. But the regime used that against the players in the region. Ask any of these Arab nations in the region, they were afraid to rock the boat with Tehran. And of course, the most important way to rock the boat with Tehran is to somehow side with the organized opposition in Iran. Tehran has made it a red line to all of the countries that the one place you can't go is this organized resistance. You know, the Alibabi, who is now the deputy foreign minister for, you know, international affairs, legal affairs, he said that since about two and a half years ago, in every single meeting they have had with their foreign counterparts, whether it was in Europe or in the region, everywhere, one of the topics on the table, no matter what the issue is, is the issue of the organized resistance, specifically the MEK and asking them to demonize them, to limit their activities. Look at how they treated Albania, that has about 3,000 members of the MEK based there in Ashraf. Three, they waged a huge cyber attack on the Albanian infrastructure in Europe, telling them, if you want those cyber attacks to stop, you need to stop facilitating the, you know, hosting the MEK there. And that's why it's so important to fight back, to tell the Iranian regime that we're going to hold you accountable, we're not going to reward you. This is the end of it. That policy of the past 40 years is over.

[Mike Baker]

But do you have optimism that that is going to happen? And then there's. There's two parts to this question. I got to be mindful of our time. But first part would be you talk about that and sort of the. The support from the international community. Do you think that. That things have changed sufficiently in terms of the weakening of the Iranian regime that that could happen. And then I, if you could, in a very, and I know this is tough to do, but in short order, if you could provide a just sort of from your perspective, you know, how close is the regime to, you know, announcing to the world that they're suddenly a member of the nuclear club?

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

Well, this last question I can't answer intelligently because honestly, I don't know. But I can tell you based on what we know already and we know a lot, but not everything, they are, they are close. They have worked on all of those elements and they're, they have actually sped up their dash towards building the bomb. This is perhaps the very last leg left for the Ayatels as a tool for their survival. But in terms of the prospect, I think I'm very optimistic, not just because of the policies outside of the world, but I think very optimistic about what's really happening on the ground inside the country. This regime is so weak. Their economy is just like nothing is working because the economy is built on corruption, is built on further empowering the Revolutionary Guards. No matter how much money you give them, still the economy is going to go down. The past four years that the export of oil went up to close to 2 million barrels a day, up from about 2, 300,000. You would think the economy of the country would improve. It did made it worse. And it actually, of course, it made their Revolutionary Guards more powerful, more money, more funding to their proxies, but it also made them, you know, more greedy.

[Mike Baker]

So.

[Alireza Jafarzadeh]

And that's why the regime is resorting to killings. Inside Iran, the past one year, 1000 execution of prisoners has taken place. This is all sign of weakness. But also in the region, the influence of the regime has been badly shattered. There's no way they can repair it. Nothing is going to bring back what they had in Lebanon, in Syria, in Iraq, and what's really happening now in Yemen. So that's why I'm very optimistic and I think relying on the people of Iran Air Force, they are also very optimistic. They feel that now that Assad, that seemed to be invincible, just went down in 11 days. The same thing can happen in Iran. And of course what it took there was an organized force on the ground and that's the same situation in Iran. That's why I say you need to keep the focus here. And if I say like three steps that the US can do is first of all, they need to hold the regime accountable, snap back all those sanctions at the U.N. you know, bring back all the, the sanctions that were relieved and also hold the regime accountable in all different areas. Recognize the right of the people of Iran to see change. That's what you will see. Change will happen.

[Mike Baker]

Other reason, I've got a dozen or more additional questions I could throw your way right now, but we're going to have to save that for the next time. And I hope you do come back the next time because the conversation is fascinating. Alireza Jeffersade Jafarzade See, look at that. I, I almost had it. Alireza almost had it. Jafar Zade, deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, thank you for joining us today on THE SITUATION report. Well, that is all the time that we have for this week's PDB Situation report. Right. A lot of information there to digest. If you have any questions or comments or humorous anecdotes, please reach out to me at pdb@the first tv.com you've heard me say this before, but I mean it. The highlight of every week here at the PDB secret compound. Well, I'm not there right now. I'm on the road. But at our secret compound, which is located somewhere under a dormant volcano, is when Carl the mailman somehow finds us and drops off another sack filled to the brim with your postcards, your emails, your faxes, your telegrams, your edible fruit baskets. And every month, our amazing team, including the above average interns, well, they all select a bunch of your questions and we produce one of our critically acclaimed Ask Me Anything episodes, which is in the pipeline right now to be released very shortly. Listen finally to to hear the podcast of the of the show Ad Free, just become a premium member of the President's Daily Brief. It's very simple. By visiting PDB premium.com I'm Mike Baker. And until next time, stay informed, stay safe, stay cool.