← The President's Daily Brief
The President's Daily Brief
PDB Situation Report | May 9th, 2026: Iran Attacks American Warships Despite “Ceasefire” & Trump’s China Trip
00:54:39
Loading summary
Transcript102 lines
- [00:00]
A
I get so many headaches every month.
- [00:02]
B
It could be chronic migraine, 15 or more headache days a month, each lasting
- [00:06]
A
four hours or more. Botox Onobotulinum toxin a prevents headaches in adults with chronic migraine. It's not for Those who have 14 or fewer headache days a month. Prescription Botox is injected by your doctor. Effects of Botox may spread hours to weeks after injection, causing serious symptoms. Alert your doctor right away as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems or muscle weakness can be signs of a life threatening condition. Patients with these conditions before injection are at highest risk. Side effects may include include allergic reactions, neck and injection site pain, fatigue and headache. Allergic reactions can include rash, welts, asthma symptoms and dizziness. Don't receive Botox if there's a skin infection. Tell your doctor your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions including als, Lou Gehrig's disease, myasthenia gravis or Lambert Eaton syndrome, and medications including botulinum toxins as these may increase the risk of serious side effects.
- [00:53]
B
Why wait? Ask your doctor, visit botoxchronicmigraine.com or call
- [00:57]
A
1-844botox to learn more. 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.
- [01:14]
B
But that's weird.
- [01:16]
A
Okay, one judgment anyway. Give it a try@mintmobile.com Switch upfront payment
- [01:23]
B
of $45 for 3 month plan equivalent
- [01:24]
A
to $15 per month required intro rate first 3 months only, then full price
- [01:27]
B
plan options available, taxes and fees extra. See full terms@mintmobile.com. Welcome to the PDB Situation Report. I'm Mike Baker, your eyes and ears on the world stage. All right, let's get briefed. First up, American destroyers come under missile and drone attack in the Strait of Hormuz, triggering US Retaliatory strikes on Iranian targets even as President Trump insists that the ceasefire remains fully intact. I think we might be changing the definition of the word ceasefire. We'll be joined by Jonathan Schanzer of the foundation for Defense of Democracies. For more on that later in the show, President Trump prepares for a critical summit with Xi Jinping in Beijing with major disputes over trade, Taiwan and Iran looming over the tops. Now, a preview of that meeting and all things China. We'll have that with Joshua Phillip. He's the senior investigative reporter for the Epoch Times. But first, today's Situation report. Spotlight American Warships came under missile drone and small boat attack on Thursday while transiting the strain of Hormuz, triggering, of course, US Retaliatory strikes against Iranian targets along the coast. According to US Central Command, three destroyers successfully intercepted all incoming threats before American forces struck Iranian launch sites and command infrastructure in response. But despite the exchange of fire, the White House insisted the ceasefire with Iran remains fully intact. President Trump even described the retaliation as, quote, just a love tap. Well, who wants a love tap like that? While administration officials say these clashes don't amount to a return to full scale war. Now, to help us break this down, we're joined by Jonathan Schanzer. He's the executive director of, of the foundation for Defense of Democracies. Jonathan, thank you very much for joining us again here on the Situation report.
- [03:30]
C
Good to be with you again.
- [03:31]
B
Well, all right, it's a ceasefire, except we're shooting at each other. Where are we? What is going on?
- [03:43]
C
All right, here's best I can tell you is this. We've hit pretty much everything we want to nuke program has been set back significantly. Missiles have been reduced, missile launchers have been reduced, IRGC headquarters and leaders and everything else. Right. We've knocked the heck out of the regime. What is, I think the problem is the regime is obviously refused to surrender. They won't capitulate. But then I think what we have on top of that is a reluctance on the part of this administration, this Department of War, to, well, to, to use more munitions. I mean, there's always stuff you can continue to bomb. The question is whether it's wor bombing because these munitions are expensive, they're very precise. We need them for other potential conflicts. And so the idea of burning them right now doesn't make a lot of sense. So I think what we're doing right now is trying to pivot into what would only be described as an economic war. Right. We're putting the blockade on their ships. We're going to force them to cap their wells. We're going to deprive them of additional cash through sanctions and maybe tariffs and cutting off their banks. That stuff is probably going to do more damage to the regime than hitting them with munitions that we want to save for other things. There could be other phases to this, too, covert stuff or what have you. But I think the President's being smart here to not get goaded in to a conflict where we start dropping more weapons and put ourselves potentially in a tight spot further on down the line when we should be looking to replenish and Reload.
- [05:20]
B
Yeah, no, I get it. I mean the stockpiles are, regardless of whatever the Pentagon is saying, the stockpiles are significantly reduced and you've got a really significant lag time in terms of point of order and manufacturer to delivery on those weapon systems. So you don't replace them overnight. But part of that, talking about this economic war, maybe I'm getting a little bit too far into soft science, is that it would imply that, you know, somehow this regime, which is the same regime as when we started and just different faces, is somehow concerned about the well being or comfort level of their people and they just finished slaughtering thousands of them back in January. So it's a little bit like, you know, if you own a business, right. And you come upon hard times, well what do you do? You don't fire yourself. You're the last person to walk out the door and turn off the lights. So I'm not sure that we understand just how, what the nature is, I guess of these people of this regime.
- [06:28]
C
Yeah, look, you're right, they're going to try to pass on the pain. It's what they've been doing for decades now is we've had sanctions on this regime and you know, it's, it's kind of ebbed and flowed. There have been times where we've really heaped on the pressure at times where we've relax it. Obviously the Obama administration being the prime example of that. But Biden also relaxed some of these, Trump's heaped it back on. Right. We saw the maximum pressure campaign from the first administration. We're going to see it, I think ramp up even further right now. But I think the real question is you cap those wells, that's going to come in the next week or two and that's going to significantly hinder the regime's ability to bring in more cash they can't export through the straight of Hormuz. That's something like 15% of their economy already shut down with more on the way if they can't make payroll. And you start to have the loyalists from the regime, the irgc, the most loyal, you know, psychotic regime supporters, if they're not willing to show up to work because they're not going to get paid. And they don't see the prospects of having those wells come back online that you can't see the export of oil coming back online. That's where I think you may start to see, you know, the natives get restless. I think there's the other part of this too, which is you Know, the currency in Iran is basically devoid of all value. You know, general goods, food, you know, medicine, tobacco, all the stuff that, you know, generally people are going to want harder and harder to get, harder and harder to purchase. That's going to potentially lead people back out into the streets at some point. We don't know when. I think the real key right now, and I don't have any insight into exactly what's happening on that covert level, but my hope is whether it's the CIA, whether it's the Mossad or some other intelligence agency, maybe closer to the action, they need to be providing the weapons, the cash, the training, the secure communications, the intelligence, so that the people of Iran can begin to rise up. There's 90 million people in that country. 80% of them hate the regime, truly hate it. And so the question is, can we capitalize on that as this regime continues to go through the crisis that it does?
- [08:50]
B
Yeah, yeah. I mean, there was talk about that, you'll recall, early in this conflict in terms of, oh, maybe it's the Kurds, maybe the Kurds can, you know, come in and. And I don't know that there's a. And I'm just speaking from experience, I don't know that there's a covert campaign going on right now. I'd be speculating as well. Just based on decades of dealing with this problem, I'm somewhat skeptical that there is a significant program going on to train or arm or resource the people of Iran. They've been hung out to dry numerous times by the international community. So I just. I hope that's not the case, but I'm not optimistic on that front. How good, Jonathan, how good is our intelligence about the Iranian reserves across the board, their treasury, in terms of their cash on hand, their ability to store oil? You know, how close are they getting to running out of essentially places to put oil that they're pumping? You know, how good do you think our information is at this stage?
- [10:02]
C
Look, I think it's pretty good. And I would keep an eye on Scott Bessant, Secretary of the treasury, who's running the traps on Operation Economic Fury, as they're calling it. You know, I think that's going to be the interesting thing to watch here. You know, in terms of the wells, my understanding is we're a week or maybe two or three away from watching them actually start to lose the ability to pump oil. That's going to be significant. You got to remember, oil is like 90% of their economy. That's enormous right now. Not every well is going to get shut, but my understanding is they're running out of places to store the oil that they're pumping and they definitely don't have the ability to send it out because the US is imposing this blockade. As far as reserves go, I don't have a clear sense of cash reserves, but the one thing that I am actually really interested in is over the course of the last decade, the regime has been stockpiling gold. And of course, gold is a commodity that is fungible and can be used in payment. It stores value pretty well and it's probably going up or will go up the more this crisis plays out. And by the way, I think it should be noted here that it's really the Turks, the Emiratis, a little bit of Venezuela, that there were three countries that helped the Iranians get there. I think they've yet to really pay the price for having done so. But you know, there I think you've got billions of dollars stored in gold and that's going to be something to watch. Hopefully they start to spend that down and that crisis continues to deepen. But the big resource that I think we need to be looking at right now for the Iranian regime is actually China. The Chinese continue to provide a massive amount of support to this regime. They want to try to keep it up. They want to not let this thing collapse. That is Xi Jinping's primary objective. Here at ftd, we talk a lot about what we call the axis of aggressors, how China, Russia and the Islamic Republic of Iran work together. They're like a three legged stool. The idea here is block the Chinese from giving the Iranians what they need and eventually we might be able to kick one of the legs out of that three legged stool and to really destabilize this axis.
- [12:20]
B
Yeah. Are they talking about China, Chinese regime, Xi Jinping, Are they in this because Iranian oil, I mean, they purchased some, what, 90% of Iranian energy, But are they in it because of that, because it's important to China's capabilities and reserves, or are they in it because they're just tickled pink that the US is blowing through munitions and is distracted?
- [12:51]
C
I mean, I think the answer is yes, right? To both. Right. I mean, the regime was selling oil at a discount to the Chinese, right? That something like 70 cents on the dollars, what they were selling their oil for because their oil was sanctioned and the Chinese were just thrilled to be able to buy it on the cheap. And now what we're watching is not just that they're unable to buy that cheap oil, they actually have to now buy oil that is more expensive because of what's going on right now with this war. Interestingly, we've seen reports of a Chinese vessel getting hit, I think not deliberately by the Islamic Republic. That's going to create some interesting tensions there as well. But they definitely want to use the regime to draw the United States into a protracted conflict. They'd like to see the US Burn through more of these munitions. They'd like to see us get bogged down. I think the president's doing the right thing by focusing more on economic fury and not on epic fury. If the goal here is to is to hurt the regime and not put ourselves at the disadvantage.
- [13:57]
B
Yeah, I want to pick up right there. But first of all, Jonathan, we got to take a quick break, so I hope you'll. Don't go anywhere is what I'm saying. Don't go anywhere. We'll be back with more from Jonathan Johnson, executive director, foundation for Defense of Democracy. So please stick around. Hey, Mike Baker here with some exciting news. Well, at least I hope you'll find it exciting. Podcasts are now streaming on Fox 1. That's right, because sometimes just the headlines aren't enough. Now FOX one brings you on demand video podcasts that dive deeper into what's happening, right, getting you closer to the voices shaping the conversation across news, politics and culture. And here's the best part. I think it's the best part. The PDB is now streaming on Fox. What? That's right. You can watch my show alongside other podcasts like Hang out with Sean Hannity. I know you know him, the Riley Gaines show, and Will Kane country all in one place. Now from the stories leading the data, hot takes. I believe that's how the kids say it. Hot takes to exclusive interviews. You'll hear perspectives from the boldest voices around. Plus mine. The best part, you can watch or listen on your schedule whenever it works for you. So stream podcasts on Fox 1 anywhere, anytime, on your favorite devices. Sign up today@fox.com you're welcome, America.
- [15:17]
A
Some follow the noise. Bloomberg follows the money. Because behind every headline is a bottom line, whether it's the funds fueling AI or crypto's trillion dollar swings. There's a money side to every story. And when you see the money side, you understand what others miss. Get the money side of the story. Subscribe now@bloomberg.com
- [15:44]
C
the right window treatments change everything. Your sleep, your privacy, the way every room looks and feels. @blinds.com, we've spent 30 years making it surprisingly simple to get exactly what your home needs. We've covered over 25 million windows and have 50,000 five star reviews to prove we deliver. Whether you DIY it or want a
- [16:01]
B
pro to handle everything from measure to
- [16:03]
C
install, we have you covered. Real design professionals, free samples, zero pressure. Right now. Get up to 45% off site wide, plus get a free professional measure@blinds.com rules and restrictions apply.
- [16:15]
B
Welcome back to the PDB Situation Report. Joining me once again is Jonathan Schanzer. He's the executive director for the foundation for Defense of Democracies. We've been talking all things Iran. So the President is insisting that the ceasefire still holds. How do you interpret that? Is part of that domestic US Political pressure, meaning concern over the perception of a contract or a lengthy conflict? Boy, I just lost my words there. I have a very mild grasp of on vocabulary, Jonathan. Well, join the club. Look,
- [17:02]
C
I think the President is certainly feeling some pressure from some within his own party. I think that's part of it. I think you also have some skittish Gulf countries that were partners with us and are now maybe questioning that you maybe saw the other day that the Saudis and the Kuwaitis for at least a brief time had refused to allow the United States to operate from their bases and from their airspace. And so, you know, I think what you've got right now is a president who's trying to calm the nerves of a lot of different players domestically and abroad. And he's also hearing that he doesn't need to get into another, you know, kinetic conflict, that he'd like to try to keep a lid on things blowing up too far, too fast. So all these things, I think, have him downplaying the crisis. Right? I mean, he called these attacks on three naval ships yesterday's love taps, which is. Well, that's, that's some serious, you know, word choice right there. It's kind of silly, you know, that it's a lot more serious than that. But really the goal here is for him to try to let cooler heads prevail. He continues to dangle this deal that he's offered the Iranians. They continue to reject it. But I got to tell you, I think the time is on the side of the United States. If we play out this economic fury campaign, I think eventually the regime finds itself in worse and worse position. We're going to pretty much just stay the course here. I mean, yes, we could see some fluctuations in oil, we could see some fluctuations in natural gas. We should see I think fluctuations in the stock market, but nothing that I think should be described as a massive shock to us. I think the shock will be on the side of the Iranians, and I think, again, that plays to our advantage.
- [18:52]
B
So what's the, what's the end game? Because I'm just trying to, I don't disagree with anything you've said. I think that the, maintaining the blockade is absolutely necessary. Right. I think that most of the regional actors, certainly the majority of Iranians, everyone, would be happy to see this regime goes, but they have shown their ability to, to stick around. Right. And as you pointed out, they're not negotiating. You know, we were changing definitions of words. We've changed the definition of a ceasefire, we changed the definition of negotiations. That's not happening. And so I guess I'm wondering what, what does this look like? And I know this is, this is a kind of a silly, speculative question, but what does this look like down the road for a win? How does the White House posture this as a win if at the end of the day, all they get is the same regime again, different faces, because there was a lot of headroom created and an open straight? You know, how do you, how do you, how do you couch this as a win? And don't get me wrong, I would love to see this regime gone. I would love to have seen them gone 50 years ago.
- [20:12]
C
Yeah, I mean, I, Yeah, join the club again. I mean, you know, I'm, I'm, I'm at the top of the list of that club. I mean, this regime shouldn't have survived past 1980. Right. It was founded in 79. Once we understood exactly what they were about, you know, I think we, we probably should have taken care of business back then. That's a Jimmy Carter question. And then ultimately, I guess a Ronald Reagan one, too. But so here we are, we're dealing with them, you know, 47 years later, and they're still, they're as nasty as they were when they, when they were founded. We need to be patient here. I think the way you lose this is to try to find an easy out, right? Wars are not always quick or easy. Most are not, actually. When you look back in history, you know, we're two months into this conflict. We shouldn't expect us to just be able to say, yep, we won't. That was quick. That was easy. You know, clean hands, nothing to worry about. That's just not realistic. We, I think we're going to go through a couple of different phases of this war, right? We went through that hot and kinetic phase, that was the first month or so of this thing. We're now into an economic war. I think we ought to be doing a lot of messaging right now, which we're not doing. Right. We should be pumping messaging into that regime right now. Psychological warfare, manipulation, misinformation, disinformation, shaping that battlefield. I feel like they're doing a better job of it than we are. Part of it, if you ask me, stems from the fact that we are phobic here in Washington about saying the words regime change. Now, you know, I know why we're concerned about it, right? Iraq, Afghanistan, we had debacles, you know, earlier on in this century. But that doesn't mean that we still can't call for it. Continue to delegitimize this regime, encourage people to come out in the streets and take shots at the IRGC and the besiege. There's a lot more that I think we can do there. The economic more can still ramp up. We have kinetic means available to us if and when we want to use it. But this thing needs to be hybrid. And I just think that, you know, I don't. What I. I guess the bottom line is this thing is not going to be linear. No one should expect it to be that way. For anybody that studied war over time and you look at, look back at history, sometimes you just got to try it from a bunch of different angles until you find that one big weakness or multiple weaknesses that will ultimately defeat your enemy. We haven't quite found it yet, but the enemy is weaker, right? I mean, it has lost an enormous amount of money. It's lost an enormous amount of military capability. That's a good thing. Let's build on that and let's bring this to conclusion.
- [22:48]
B
Yeah, I think that the interesting aspect here is, and you talked about the people, 80, I think you mentioned 80% of the people are, you know, soundly against this regime. I would argue it's probably higher if, you know, they could speak openly. But, you know, there was this idea that once we started this conflict, you know, the people would come back out in the street despite the fact that they just watched thousands and thousands of their friends and family being slaughtered in January when the regime put down those protests. That's an enormous lift to ask people to come out when the security apparatus still exists. They still the ones with the guns and they've shown their willingness to use them repeatedly. So I think you have to almost set that aside and say, okay, well, we want the people themselves because that's always been sort of this hope, this holy grail that we're not going to do regime change. And you're right, it's a dirty phrase in Washington. And so we always would couch it in ways like, well, it has to happen from inside, has to be the people themselves have to rise up. I don't know. And that's why I remain so, unfortunately, so pessimistic or cynical that that can happen under, even under this economic pressure. And now we see, and you mentioned, we talked about China briefly, but now we see that the Chinese regime advising their companies to ignore the U.S. sanctions. Right. So now you've got China not, not just covertly or in the shadows, buying up Iranian oil through a bevy of single purpose companies and shadow fleets, but now you've got them openly, publicly coming out from their Commerce Ministry saying just ignore the US Sanctions and kind of daring the White House into a situation when a week from now supposedly Xi Jinping and President Trump are supposed to sit down. That's going to be an interesting conversation. Yeah, it will be.
- [24:45]
C
And it's already been delayed because of this war. And I think Donald Trump had hoped to bring sort of a fait accompli to that meeting and to show Xi Jinping, look, we just, you know, we exerted our will. You know, the might of the US Military is on full display and we just conquered your ally and now we got to make some deals about other parts of the world. I think that, I mean, the one thing that I would just say in response to the way you framed it, it's all true, except for this thing, is the Chinese have always flaunted our sanctions. They've always put a finger in our eye and we've kind of allowed it. We've always understood it. That doesn't mean, though, that they're going to get away with it. We will sanction Chinese entities that continue to violate our sanctions, these teapot refineries and other things, you know, that, that have served the Chinese over time. We have the ability to still impose some pain on the Chinese. But I do think that there probably needs to be some horse trading at this summit that hopefully helps Donald Trump get to a, you know, a satisfying conclusion of this war so that we can begin to deal with some other things. Because don't forget, we got Taiwan kind of lingering out there. You got Chinese malign influence in the United States that we got to deal with. There's a lot here on the table that goes well beyond the Islamic Republic and the war that is playing out
- [26:04]
A
right now in the Middle East.
- [26:06]
B
Yeah. Well, Jonathan, I can only hope that during this summit, if the summit does actually take place between Xi and President Trump, that perhaps she, you know, a light bulb comes on and maybe he can offer the current existing Iranian regime leadership, he could offer him safe haven and apartments in some assisted living facility outside of Beijing. Get them out of the country and give the Iranian people a chance for a brilliant future. Jonathan, listen, thank you very much, man. I always enjoy these conversations very, very much and appreciate your time and I hope you'll come back. Will do.
- [26:42]
C
Thanks for having me.
- [26:44]
B
Excellent. Thank you, man. John Deschanzer, the executive director, foundation for Defense of Democracies. Great guide. Terrific insight and a lot there to think about when we come back. Well, as we mentioned, President Trump was going to be traveling to Beijing next week for this summit with Xi Jinping. Wouldn't you like to be a fly on that wall? Well, you wouldn't want to be a fly. How about you just have a chair there and you can sit and listen and drink some tea. But anyway, that'll be coming up. And joining us to discuss that will be Joshua Phillips of Philip of the Epoch Times. We'll be right back. Hey, Mike Baker here. Now, many of you know me as the host of the President's Daily Brief. At least I hope you know me as the host of the pdb. But I am also a business owner. That's right, have been for years. And I want to take just a moment to talk with all you business owners out there. Now, you probably already know that small businesses face an uphill battle with big banks, right, where getting a loan means endless paperwork and delays. But let me tell you about a business out there working to make life easier for small businesses. Of course, I'm talking about Cardiff. For bank rates without the wait, go to Cardiff Co PDB for up to $500,000 in funding. Their application takes less than five minutes. It has no impact on personal credit, and approvals can happen in minutes. With same day funding. It's the fastest way to get the capital you need to keep your business moving forward. Look, banks try to block out small businesses, but Cardiff has the key. Big banks may not want to approve your business loans, but Cardiff does. If you've been in business for at least a year and are pulling in $20,000 a month in revenue, apply now for up to $500,000 in same day business funding at Cardiff Co PDB. Again, that's Cardiff Co PDB. Real growth, fast funding. That's Cardiff Fox News is now streaming
- [28:43]
C
live on Fox 1.
- [28:45]
B
When news breaks, we don't just report it.
- [28:48]
C
We go beyond the headlines.
- [28:50]
B
Get the full story, get live coverage in depth. Analysis and perspectives from the voices you
- [28:56]
C
trust all in one place.
- [28:58]
B
Whether you're at home or on the go, stay connected to the stories shaping our world stream. Fox News on Fox 1 download today,
- [29:10]
A
a T shirt and jeans, Mac and cheese. Some things in life are an obvious match, like Rias and Schwab Advisor Services, the number one choice for independent advisors.
- [29:20]
B
The difference is so obvious. It's Schwabius. Learn why@schwabius.com welcome back to the PDP Situation Report. President Trump is set to travel to Beijing next week for a high stakes meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping as tensions between Washington and Beijing remain elevated over a number of issues, including military activity in the South China Sea and China's relationship with Iran. The summit comes at a critical moment with the White House simultaneously trying to manage negotiations with Tehran while also pressuring Beijing over its continued purchases of sanctioned Iranian oil. Now both sides are publicly signaling a willingness to stabilize relations. But behind the scenes, major disagreements remain unresolved and the outcome of the meeting could shape the next phase of US China relations. For more on this, I want to turn to Joshua Phillip. He's a senior investigative reporter for the Epoch Times and host of the aptly titled Josh Phillips Show. You can check him out on YouTube. Just head on over to YouTube, of course, and search up at the Josh Phillips Show. Joshua, thank you very much, man, for joining us here on the Situation Report.
- [30:34]
A
Hey, it's a real pleasure being here.
- [30:36]
B
Outstanding. Well, hopefully you feel that same way after we finish our conversation. So, first question, how'd you come up with a name for your show?
- [30:45]
A
You know, it took a lot of thinking. I really put my head to it and, you know, I'd like to think of it as a type of creative genius, you know, just putting my name on.
- [30:56]
C
Went through a lot of.
- [30:57]
B
Went through a lot of. Yeah, yeah, finally. Yeah, that suddenly dawned on me. Now.
- [31:02]
C
That's, that's, that's great.
- [31:03]
B
Well, I encourage people to check it out again. It's on YouTube and you just search up at the Josh Phillips Show. Well, let's go from the 30,000 foot view on this Chinese discussion. Will the summit between Trump and Xi actually take place, do you think?
- [31:22]
A
I do think it'll take place. I think China is looking a lot more forward to talking than Trump is. Economically, China's basically dying right now, at least, at least internally. Externally, they still have a lot of influence with, with Iran oil being cut off, with fertilizers being cut off, with Venezuel oil being cut off, with the heavy sanctions from on Russia, which is damaging their ability to import from Russia as well. With the real estate industry drying up, manufacturing leaving China's even putting, even putting bans on people pulling their businesses out of China right now. They're desperate for a trade deal. They're desperate to try to end the war with Iran. They're really desperate in a lot of ways. And so Trump has a lot of cards to play. Personally, I hope he just does something that doesn't, doesn't allow the CCP to again begin kind of steamrolling us on the global stage by manipulating things.
- [32:20]
B
It's interesting what you just said, and I'm gonna, I guess I'm gonna take the other side of this just for the sake of a conversation, but when you said that they're desperate to end the war in Iran, I look at it a little differently. I look at it like they're delighted by the fact that we are distracted, that we are spending significant resources, that we're blowing through munitions stockpiles. Why do you think that they're desperate to see that conflict end?
- [32:47]
A
Well, there's two sides of it. And I mean, the opposition view actually has some truth to it because the CCP does want a war there. But what they don't want is Trump basically changed the game when he launched his counter blockade because Iran blockaded it. They were effectively just strangling off the rest of the world's economy. They were still letting the Chinese, you know, oil and stuff through. So China was not really impacted so much by that until Trump blockaded it as well. And so Trump now by doing that is kind of forcing them to the negotiating table. On the point you made, sorry. The Chinese Communist Party actually does have a plan. They have a five part war plan that does in fact involve starting a war in the Middle east and especially, especially with terrorist groups. And Iran was going to be a key part of that. They do want to have a war, but not one that impacts them.
- [33:42]
B
Yeah, I take your point. The Communist Party does not like chaos and they don't like the unknown. They don't like to think about the unknown. So that's a, that's a very good point. What do you think they. Okay, so let's, let's say the summit takes place. You know, and I think the reason I asked that question is because in today's world, it seems like things change. Minute to minute. But imagine they do sit down. How entertaining will this see? What do you think is going to be top of the agenda? Both. And let's look at it from both sides, from Trump's perspective and from Xi's perspective. What's that? That top priority that they want to get out on the table?
- [34:23]
A
Trump more than anything wants rare earth elements. We need a lot of the materials coming from China. They know they have a stranglehold on that. That's going to be on Trump's side, the main thing he wants. China basically wants sanction relief and they want, they want tariffs to end. And, you know, the reality is with a lot of the, at least the tariffs, that it is possible that when Trump leaves office, those will go away anyways. They might want to just hunker down and so on. Also on the table is going to be Russia. China is of course, at least according to NATO and According to the U.N. the Chinese Communist Party is the U.N. of course, heavily covered by China. But still China is of course, the main enabling force on Russia's side with that war. And China also, and I think tried China also wants to kind of rebuild some of its manufacturing. They don't want Trump, you know, pushing to pull real estate out or, sorry, manufacturing out of China. That's going to be a big, a big goal for them. But, but the bigger picture here is this. In terms of U.S. defense, in terms of the future of the United States, in terms of Trump's whole economic plan, what does he want? Trump wants a rebuilding of American manufacturing. Manufacturing is not just factories. Manufacturing is materials. Timber, it's rare earth elements, it's steel, it's logistics, it's the entire infrastructure that allows for that. Military writings have come out saying that if America went to war right now, like full scale war, we'd probably lose because we don't have wartime manufacturing. Trump knows we need to rebuild wartime manufacturing. That's not even just the factories. That means the rare earth elements, that means steel again, that means other things. And so the trajectory of the rebuilding of American infrastructure, the rebuilding of American manufacturing bases, will in and of itself undermine frankly, the interests of a lot of our allies and our enemies like China. This will pull a lot out of Canada, it'll pull a lot out of Mexico. We actually lost a ton of factories to. It'll pull a ton out of China. Because a lot of these countries, their economies are basically built as kind of connecting forces to the American economy in a weird way. And so they only stand to lose. The question is how Much can they mitigate that. And from China's perspective, they tend to view America as on a four to eight year cycle with our presidential elections. They might take the bet that the next president who comes in is going to be more favorable to them. They might take the bet that say, hey, did we just hunker down? We just have to wait up at Trump years. We can make a deal and just violate it. So they can make the worst deal for them possible, the best deal for us, and just violate it. And they know that they can do that and they often do that. So we'll have to see if Trump understands all this going in.
- [37:29]
B
Yeah, it's a very interesting point. I would suggest that there's a number of nations out there that are just operating under that theory, which is we're just going to bide our time, whether it's Iran, the regime in Iran is certainly looking at that. They're constantly buying time. And I think they look at this and think, well, if we can just outright Trump, then we win. And so it is interesting, but it implies that, you know, the China and, and the US they sit down at this, at a summit like this. I guess the question is if you have a Venn diagram, and I know you're impressed that I know the term Venn diagram, but if you have a Venn diagram, I don't understand it, but I just, I, I, I did, I, you know, I wanted to bring it up. There's really no crossover in terms of where us and, and Chinese, you know, collide, where they're the same. You know, are there any spots there where we actually have the same interests? And I don't just mean the same interests as in we both want rare earth minimals, for example, but I mean, where we both want the same outcome.
- [38:42]
A
Well, this is the unfortunate reality. So the Chinese Communist Party basically knows that, you know, it's its entire system. People see these big buildings with shiny neon lights and all that. The entire economic boom in China was not created by the Chinese Communist Party. It was actually created by foreign investment in Western manufacturing. It was during the reforms and opening up during Deng Xiaoping, right, which was like three leaders ago in China. If they know that if they lose foreign manufacturing and foreign investment, they're going to go right back to where they were before, which is effectively like a peasant economy. I mean, you have people living like $100 a month. It's like, it's like nothing. There's the overwhelming majority of the country is in extreme, extreme poverty. And the money they do have. Most of it is not domestic. Most of it comes from other countries. And so the hard reality for the United States is the Venn diagram kind of overlap we have. The overlap we have is people looking for financial interest. It's investors. It's people invested in businesses that do have a Chinese element. It's businesses in the United States that want China open because they want access to all the people there because they think it's a big market. It's that side and the ccp, their big argument is that the weakness of capitalism is material interest. So they can manipulate basically greed or monetary interest in order to make a sacrifice. Our own interests and our own values. They know in the long term, they're waging financial war on us. They're effectively taking over our factories. They're ripping us off. They're running gray markets, manufacturing the same products. We basically put a factory there. They'll manufacture your product, then they'll build the second or third factory building the same product, and they just sell it on the Internet alongside yours and just put you out of business. Or they'll use the steel, they do all that source code.
- [40:44]
B
Or they'll, you know, they'll figure out again, you haven't even mentioned and because, you know, you had a long list there. But we can also include economic espionage, theft of research and development, intellectual property. Oh, and that's over decades, right? That's not just something that's. That's become a concern recently. Joshua, if you could stay right there, I want to pick up the conversation. But first, we do have to take a quick break. And then we'll be back with more from Joshua Phillip of the Apoc Times. Don't forget, you can check him out on YouTube. It's at the Josh Phillips show. We'll be right back, so stick around.
- [41:19]
C
Hey, this is Mike Slater.
- [41:21]
A
I have a podcast called Politics by Faith.
- [41:23]
C
I would love for you to listen.
- [41:24]
B
We take the news of the day
- [41:26]
A
and we run it through the Bible.
- [41:27]
C
What does the Bible have to say about this?
- [41:28]
A
Because there's nothing new under the sun.
- [41:31]
C
Read the headlines.
- [41:31]
B
Everything's all crazy.
- [41:32]
C
World's coming to an end.
- [41:33]
B
It's all in the Bible.
- [41:34]
C
And after every episode, hopefully you leave with a proper perspective and a biblical piece.
- [41:40]
B
Please join us wherever you listen to podcasts.
- [41:42]
A
And we also have a YouTube page as well. YouTube.com politicsbyfaith
- [41:50]
C
Every major story has a
- [41:51]
B
version the news gives you and then
- [41:53]
A
a version that's actually true.
- [41:56]
B
If you're a critical thinker, if you're
- [41:58]
A
somebody who's not tribal.
- [41:59]
B
If you're somebody who just wants the
- [42:01]
A
facts so you can make your own decisions, Keeping It Real with Jillian Michaels
- [42:06]
C
is the show for you.
- [42:07]
A
Subscribe now, wherever you get your podcasts.
- [42:10]
B
Hey, Bill O'Reilly here. Please check out my new interview series. We'll do it live. Each Thursday, I sit down with the most influential people in America where I know some spin chat, no script, anything could happen. You can find. We'll do it live on BillOriley.com YouTube or wherever you download your podcast. Welcome back to the PDB Situation report. We're joined again by Joshua Phillip. He's the senior investigative reporter at the Epoch Times. Joshua, thank you very much for sticking around here. Let me ask you this about this upcoming summit, and I know this is completely speculation. That's why I love to ask the question, but what if you if there's going to be one takeaway from this, if there'll be one concrete action point that comes out of this summit, what would you expect it to be?
- [43:14]
A
I expect that agreement like this, China will make an agreement on paper. They're going to say that they'll work with Trump to help pressure Iran to end the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. The counter blockade is really affecting China more weak because, you know, Iran used to let Chinese oil through. Basically, there's going to be some pressure to help mediate a plan with Russia to help end the war there. It's not going to I don't think it's going to result in much because China actually wants these wars to be maintained. In exchange, you're going to see probably China get more, maybe tariff relief, which is going to help them bounce back on the manufacturing front. They want factories, they want to rebuild. On that end, Trump also really wants rare earth elements. In exchange for that, China is going to want semiconductors. And so you might watch America maybe end some restrictions on semiconductor exports to China and that and the like. And in exchange for that, we'll get rare earth elements. That's going to be a temporary deal, though, because Trump does want in the long term, he does very much want in the long term to rebuild our own mining and refinement of those.
- [44:22]
B
Yeah. And that's a, you know, the big part of that is the regulatory concerns in the U.S. obviously. I mean, it takes it takes decades to, you know, get permits to dig anything out of the ground in the US and they've been working to change that over the past year or so that we've had the Trump administration. But if you want to compete with the Chinese in that area, then we've got to change the regulations in the U.S.
- [44:50]
C
now,
- [44:53]
B
I suppose from Xi Jinping's perspective, you mentioned the Chinese support for Russia earlier on in our conversation, the primary support for Putin during the course of his four year plus invasion. Do you think that Trump will bring up, or the team there will bring up Chinese support to Iran? Because there has been some reporting talking about, and obviously Russia's been engaged in this as well. But providing real support to them targeting data. Right. You know, sigint information, allowing them to be more lethal, meaning the Iranian regime in their attacks against US facilities and assets. Do you imagine that would come up or do you think that's too much of a flashpoint and they're going to try to keep this on a, on a diplomatic level where they don't, you know, get up from the table and walk away?
- [45:53]
A
I think it might be brought up, but I don't think that's going to be a negotiating point because China basically when it comes to Russia, Iran and China and North Korea and used to be Venezuela, but now other countries include, you know, Brazil is kind of the big one now. Lulu just met with Trump in Washington. For example, the CCP is kind of the leader of the, the global kind of opposition to the United States. And this is just kind of a given like this, this is relatively known. They supply it to Russia, they supply to Iran, they supply to a lot of our enemies, Chinese armaments. Right. Whenever we go to these countries, it was Chinese anti, anti air systems, it was Chinese radar systems as you mentioned, the targeting systems. It's, it's just what they do is kind of the counter to U.S. interests. I don't think that will be part of the negotiations because they're not going to fold on that. But, but I do think we will see some pressure on the diplomatic side.
- [46:50]
B
Well, there's nothing like diplomatic pressure to get the CCP to not change their mind or do anything of any substance. No, I, you know what, I shouldn't say that. I, I don't, I don't mean to be critical.
- [47:00]
C
That's true. Yeah.
- [47:03]
B
I just don't think a harshly worded memo is going to, going to shift them off of any significant position. Yeah, it is, it is, it is interesting and I agree, I think they'll probably look to come away with a win, whatever that is, both sides obviously. But I think you're also right in the sense that, you know, will they stick to an agreement? You remember when, when I think it was Xi and Obama stood side by side and supposedly the, you know, the CCP was promising not to engage in any more cyber shenanigans. And I don't believe that held up.
- [47:41]
A
That did not hold up whatsoever. They actually went even further with it, which is they started embedding. Basically what China did is they changed their own laws to make it so that any devices made in China, any manufacturing, any companies that are Chinese, even if they cooperate with an American company. Chinese law dictates that this, under the National Security Law that all data needs to be secure and viewable by the Chinese Communist Party. So rather than having to steal stuff using military hackers, which they still do, they just make it so that if you're working with China or China has a factory building the components and they build it for most electronics that they have to put embedded spy material, spy elements in these devices. You know, even Congress now is starting to debate this. They just embedded it into the technology itself and then passed in their law the requirements. So it looks like it's Chinese law instead of cybercrime.
- [48:39]
B
Yeah, well, you have to, I suppose you have to give them credit for consistency. They've been doing this for a long time. And you know, I guess, you know, I don't want to, I don't want to keep beating that dead horse. I've talked a lot over the years about, about theft of intellectual property and the damage that's done to the US in terms of dollars and also opportunity lost and jobs and everything else. Have you had a chance to go through their new five year plan that they've come out with? I mean, the Communist Party.
- [49:11]
A
Well, and they do them pretty often. I mean there's nothing especially different right now. They're talking about kind of the hunkering down survival of the Chinese Communist Party side of it. They keep talking about economic growth. I mean it's CCP talking points. And the reality is a lot of it's a Ponzi scheme. A lot of the public plans that we hear from in the west is not kind of the real internal plan. Oftentimes it's kind of what they want the world to hear. And so they'll talk about economic bounce back, they'll say, you know, 3.5% economic growth. And you know, if you, if you try to investigate that, they literally will put you in prison for it. They call you a spy. If you do that, it violates their espionage, espionage laws. So they're going to keep pushing the
- [49:57]
B
same narrative when you talk about, and this last question, I Want to be mindful of your time. But when you talk about the state of the, of the Chinese economy, right, you talk about it sort of, you know, it's, it's getting a little bit sideways. It's, it's in bad condition, whatever. How good is our intelligence for that? How good is our understanding, I mean, our real understanding of the Chinese economy and how much of that is just sort of. Because you'll hear this consistently, just like you would hear with, you know, oh, you know, the Iranian regime, they're going to collapse, or they're, you know, they're, you know, the people will rise up. Part of that, you know, we're going to sell democracy to Afghanistan, you know, so part of it is us mirroring our values and our hopes and our optimism onto things. So is the Chinese economy, you know, actually in a bad state at this point?
- [50:47]
C
That's.
- [50:47]
B
That's the question. And I took a long time to get to that question.
- [50:51]
A
Yes, the Chinese economy is an incredibly, incredibly bad state right now. Roughly a third of their economy was in real estate. They were, they were propping that up using mega projects, you know, the ghost cities, airports to nowhere, freeways to nowhere. I mean, it was that kind of stuff. That entire economy is basically gone. They tried replacing it with the Belt and Road Initiative by exporting that model elsewhere. And a lot of countries have also either gotten. They've gotten so deep into the debt traps it doesn't quite work anymore, or they've gone to the point where they understand the whole thing is kind of a trend, a debt trap. You know, it's not a good deal. They're trying to get new countries on board with it, having a lot of trouble on the manufacturing side, roughly, again, another third of their economy. A lot of companies are pulling out. A lot of this doesn't even have to do with the United States. A lot of it had to do with COVID when the CCP was locking down exports and locking down the ports and stuff like that. Also, because cost of manufacturing has gone up in China, you can manufacture cheaper elsewhere with a lot less pressure and a lot less oversight. So the, the benefit of being in China is not really there. The, the one thing that is going to help bail out the ccp, which from, again, you know, you talk about the intel side. The hard reality is a lot of, there are people in the United States who don't care about human rights. They don't care about Oregon harvesting, they don't care about slavery, even though they'll try to, you know, make Public statements. I'm talking businesses, Right. Even though they make big statements on it. Like the entire garment industry in China is almost entirely slave run. The entire cotton industry is slaves for the most part. It's Muslim Uyghurs mostly. They don't care about this stuff. And when they see the Chinese economy suffering, what they see is a market being restrained effectively by, you know, tariffs, which they view as an artificial, an artificial kind of a foot holding them down. And they believe that tariff relief will bounce it back. So a lot of people want to pour money in and then they want to pressure the US to give san tariff relief and then sanction relief also to bounce it back to an extent, which means they're going to make out like bandits. So financial interest abroad is, is the bigger factor here in some ways.
- [53:08]
B
Well, I've got, let's see, I've got one, two, I've got two more pages of questions for you. And we have no more time. So that means you got to come back, Joshua. So you got to pick up the phone when we call you again.
- [53:22]
A
It'd be a pleasure. Thank you.
- [53:24]
B
Excellent. Well, listen, thank you very much, Joshua from the Epoch Times, senior Investigative Reporter. Well, that is all the time we have for this week's PDB situation report. I know, but don't worry, we'll be back again next weekend with America's favorite weekend news podcast. I just, I just made up that statistic, but I think it's got to be somewhat true. Well, if you have any questions or comments, maybe you've got a humorous anecdote, maybe you've got a limerick. I don't know if people still do limericks. It's simple. You can just send them to me at pdb@thefirsttv.com. you know what we do, right? Every week we gather around our mahogany conference table and we, we actually invite the interns too, because they're required to show up and bring donuts. Then we go through your, your questions and your comments, you know, and eventually we mush them all together into a episode that we call Ask Me Anything. A new one of those just launched a few days back. So in other words, keep your cards and letters coming. Finally, to listen to the podcast of the show ad free. You can do that. It's very, very simple. Just become a premium member of the President's Daily brief by visiting PDB premium.com. i'm Mike Baker, and until next time. Well, you know the drill. Stay informed, stay safe, stay cool.
- [54:56]
A
Security program on spreadsheets, new regulations piling up and audit dread. It's time for Vanta. Vanta automates security and compliance, brings evidence into one place and cuts audit prep by 82%. Less manual work, clearer visibility, faster deals, zero chaos. Call it compliance. Or call it compliance.
- [55:16]
B
Get it?
- [55:17]
A
Join the 15,000 companies using Vanta to prove trust. Go to vanta.com.