Podcast Summary: Raging Moderates – Episode: "A Shaky Ceasefire" (ft. Rep. Jim Himes)
Release Date: June 25, 2025
Host: Scott Galloway
Guest: Congressman Jim Himes, Ranking Member on the House Intelligence Committee
Podcast: The Prof G Pod with Scott Galloway
Network: Vox Media Podcast Network
Introduction
In this episode of Raging Moderates, hosted by Scott Galloway and co-hosted by Jessica Tarlov, the discussion centers around the recent geopolitical tensions involving the United States, Israel, and Iran. The episode features a prominent guest, Congressman Jim Himes, who provides an in-depth analysis of the aftermath of Trump’s military strikes in Iran and the ensuing ceasefire's stability.
Overview of the Geopolitical Situation
Scott Galloway opens the discussion by highlighting the rapid developments following Trump's military actions against Iran. The key focus is on the attempted ceasefire between Israel and Iran, which appears to be unstable from the outset.
Scott Galloway [01:43]:
"In today's episode of Raging Moderates, we're discussing the aftermath of Trump strikes in Iran and how we got to a ceasefire and then how we didn't."
Analysis by Congressman Jim Himes
Congressman Himes delves into the complexities of the situation, emphasizing the lack of Congressional involvement in the decision to engage militarily in the Middle East. He critiques the unilateral approach taken by the administration, which bypassed both the Constitution and the War Powers Act.
Congressman Jim Himes [02:13]:
"We went into a war in the Middle East without any congressional deliberation. And that is not according to the law, either the Constitution or the War Powers Act."
Himes also assesses the tactical success of the military strike, noting that while it caused significant explosions, the long-term impact on Iran's nuclear capabilities remains uncertain. He expresses concern that the strikes may have only marginally delayed Iran's nuclear advancements.
Congressman Jim Himes [04:07]:
"I see absolutely no evidence that this did anything other than slow the Iranian role a little bit. A little bit."
Congressional Procedures and Political Implications
Scott Galloway probes Himes on whether, had the President sought Congressional approval for the strike, he would have supported it. Himes reflects on historical U.S. military interventions, citing Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan as examples where unilateral actions led to unfavorable outcomes.
Congressman Jim Himes [06:46]:
"The history of our military interventions in the region in my lifetime is pretty darn bad... What do we have to go, other than the history and the question of whether we have been successful in achieving our strategic aims in the region? And the answer to that question is pretty much generally no."
Scott Galloway’s Perspectives on Policy and Media
Galloway expresses concern over the President’s approach to foreign policy, particularly his public declarations on platforms like Truth Social and his reliance on allies like Israel without broader international support. He criticizes the lack of a unified Western front and the inconsistent messaging from U.S. leadership.
Scott Galloway [30:02]:
"Who on earth is actually going to report on what has happened? Who has the credibility, what institution, what experts are going to be able to put out any credible evidence one way or the other of the level of damage or lack thereof of these facilities?"
Implications for U.S. Foreign Policy and Alliances
The conversation highlights the strained relationship between the executive branch and Congress regarding foreign interventions. Himes underscores the importance of adhering to Constitutional processes and the negative repercussions of bypassing established protocols.
Congressman Jim Himes [14:40]:
"Just because something is hard or inconvenient doesn't mean that you could violate the law or the Constitution."
Galloway emphasizes the need for a robust and consistent foreign policy strategy, advocating for more collaborative efforts with allies to maintain credibility and effectiveness in international relations.
Scott Galloway [36:36]:
"We have a president who does not understand this is not a business deal. The truces between warring nations take weeks if not months to implement."
Conclusion
The episode concludes with both hosts reflecting on the complexities of the current geopolitical landscape. They express cautious optimism about the potential outcomes of the ceasefire but remain skeptical of its longevity without broader international support and adherence to Constitutional processes.
Jessica Tarlov [21:12]:
"If the Iranians give up their nuclear weapons or let us all hope for regime change. Remarkable. But we're not there yet."
Scott Galloway [45:14]:
"There's so much that went on over the course of the last four years, from weakening Russia, what Israel did using our weapons, the Ukrainians did using our weapons... Joe Biden governed and the foreign policy moves that he made set Trump up for success in this moment."
Key Takeaways
-
Unilateral Military Action: The President's decision to strike Iran without Congressional approval raises significant legal and strategic concerns.
-
Effectiveness of Strikes: While the immediate tactical outcomes were successful, the long-term impact on Iran's nuclear program remains doubtful.
-
Political Ramifications: The approach taken by the administration may have negative implications for U.S. foreign policy credibility and bipartisan cooperation.
-
Alliance Struggles: The lack of cohesive support from international allies undermines the stability and effectiveness of the ceasefire.
-
Future Prospects: The situation remains volatile, with potential scenarios ranging from successful regime change in Iran to further escalation of conflict.
Notable Quotes
-
Scott Galloway [06:46]:
"The history of our military interventions in the region... is pretty darn bad." -
Congressman Jim Himes [14:40]:
"Just because something is hard or inconvenient doesn't mean that you could violate the law or the Constitution." -
Scott Galloway [36:36]:
"The truces between warring nations take weeks if not months to implement." -
Jessica Tarlov [21:12]:
"If the Iranians give up their nuclear weapons or let us all hope for regime change. Remarkable. But we're not there yet."
Final Thoughts
This episode of Raging Moderates offers a critical examination of recent U.S. military actions in the Middle East, emphasizing the need for constitutional adherence, strategic foresight, and international collaboration. Congressman Jim Himes provides a sober perspective on the potential consequences of unilateral decisions, while Scott Galloway and Jessica Tarlov highlight the broader political and strategic challenges facing U.S. foreign policy.
For listeners interested in the intricate dynamics of international relations and the interplay between politics and military strategy, this episode provides valuable insights and raises important questions about the future trajectory of U.S. involvement in the Middle East.