B (2:28)

ticket in any form in 28. I'm voting for a Democrat. Say whatever you say, whatever you want, do your worst. So I mean grain of salt with anything Nick Fuentes says and he's a professional shit stirrer and he does a good job of it and has made himself a lot of money on his brand of racism and anti Semitism and all of that. But he is expressing what a lot of the America first wing of the MAGA party, which we used to think was kind of the totality of it, that the Rubio's of the world and the Lindsey Grahams were reluctantly coming along. Right. Because it was going to be a more isolationist Republican administration than we'd ever seen before. And they're realizing not so much that the Rubio's and the Lindsey Grahams have won out. And people like Megyn Kelly, Nick Fuentes there, Matt Walsh are sitting there, Tucker Carlson, you know, scratching their heads, saying this is not at all what we were promised. Now you know, get in line for all of the things that are happening to you that are not what Donald Trump promised. But this one has pretty severe consequences. I mean, as of today, we have six service members that have been killed. May their memories be a blessing. I am, we are continuing to get conflicting stories about the rationale for doing this. I mean Marco Rubio gave probably the most cogent press conference and I want to ask you about what he said there because it I don't know if the administration was happy that he came out and said it, but when he was pressed by reporters about the imminent threat, the idea that we were only going to strike Iran if we were facing an imminent threat, he said the imminent threat was that they were going to strike us if they were attacked and that Israel was going to attack them. And the America first wing of the party and it is how it even sounded to me. Me has taken that and run with the notion that we switch gears to be on Israel's timetable. And obviously there's huge military buildup in the region that's been going on for weeks or months. We obviously intended to do something, but it feels like we have been caught very back footed. Like the US Embassy in Jerusalem has said, we can't help you, we're sorry, we can't evacuate you. CBS is reporting about those six troops who died in Kuwait, that they didn't have the warning system set up. It was like a makeshift facility and they had been asking for more drone defeat capabilities, but none came. The Wall Street Journal is Talking about the US Officials who have been in briefings with access to classified information. And they say the administration's assertions are incomplete, unsubstantiated and flat out wrong. That there's no evidence to support Trump's claim that Iran could rapidly develop a missile capable of striking the U.S. so, like, how do we look at all of this and think that this was well thought out or that we have a real plan and are carrying it out?

A (5:39)

So I've equated our military interventions to Bond films. And that is they always start amazing, right? Bond films always nail the openings.

B (5:50)

The credits are top of the line, even.

A (5:52)

Well, the opening, Zoe is awesome. Yeah, every Bond film. And then it goes on to either be. Skyfall was great, Casino Royale was great. So call that Kosovo in Kuwait, or even, I'll say Venezuela, where things go really well. Or it goes on to be awful. Die Another Day, A View to a Kill, basically Iraq or Afghanistan. So, as always, and I'm curious if you perceive the same vibe shift I've seen in just 48 hours started awesome. All this military hardware, we immediately take out the equivalent of the President, the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Chiefs, we see all these inspiring short form videos of Iranian citizens rising up, and then all of a sudden it becomes clear. And you pointed this out, the majority of Americans don't support this. 7% of Democrats, 54% of Republicans. And it feels like the Republican side's waning even faster. And it feels like there's been a dramatic vibe shift based on one thing, and that is the incompetence of the administration and whoever. I don't know who's head of comms, but you should be able to answer three basic questions. Why are we doing this? Why are we doing it now? And what are the objectives? Why are we doing this? I think the biggest error to date was from Secretary Rubio, who I would have said 48 hours ago was the leading Republican candidate for president, when he said exactly what you said. He basically said, israel has now dictated foreign policy for America. He said, well, Israel was going to attack them and we knew if they attack them, they're going to respond, so we had to attack first. Like, okay, so let me get this. The tail wagging. $1.1 trillion in military spending in the most powerful country in the world is Israel. You're saying that they're dictating our. Our military interventions and foreign policy. That was an incredibly poorly thought out statement. If they had said something along the lines of, we have a tremendous opportunity to vastly diminish the nation of Iran's ability to continue to be the primary sponsor of terror and to unlock incredible economic prosperity and also bring stability to the region. And we're going to vastly diminish their kinetic capabilities. And when the following objectives are achieved, we're out of there. And we're doing it now because, let's be honest, we have an opportunity to do more damage and achieve our objectives with at a lower risk right now because they're on their back heels. Russia's busy, Hezbollah's weakened. They just don't have any, you know, they don't have any support or backup right now. So that's why now. And then what also came out that I thought was sort of weak sauce was they did identify that statement. We're going to get rid of the nuclear power. We're going to ensure their missile defenses are taken out. We're going to take out their navy right now. It comes across their communications come across as defensive and improv. They're literally. There's reports they've reached out to a bunch of traditional journalists where Trump is real time workshopping his messaging, so they feel as if it's defensive. And Jesus Christ, no one thought to answer these basic fucking questions before you deployed one of the largest military actions of the last decade. You didn't think through to have a fairly cogent answer for why, what are the objectives and why now. What it does appear to me, though, is that now that the regime is going to survive, and I still think this could have huge benefits by diminishing or neutering the kinetic capabilities of Iran, I think that's a good thing and worth a decent amount of risk. But essentially the administration looks weak. And if I were in Iran, I'd be saying, all we gotta do is wait out these guys. There's no political capital or will to put boots on the ground, which I understand. And without boots on the ground, there's never been a regime change ever in the Middle East. And these guys appear to be already taking flak or incoming from their own party, much less. The Democrats are only 7% support this. So I think the Trump administration, through incompetence and poor messaging and poor framing of the words they choose, has said to the Islamic Republic, just wait this shit out and you're going to be fine and it's going to be back to normal. So I think that the. And I'm wondering if you sense this. I sense a dramatic vibe shift in the last 48 hours that is leaking a lot of advantage and power back from the US and its allies to the Islamic Republic. I now think in Kalshi's odds, every day that the Islamic Republic falls, that the regime falls by the end of March, is going down every day. It feels as if in the last 48 hours there's been a substantial vibe shift. What do you think?

B (10:44)

Totally. And it's not good news if you've only been doing this for 72 hours and 48 of them have been a vibe shift. Right. Like that's not particularly strong odds of success or bringing over the American public to support an action as important as this. Since President Trump has said multiple times that they are open to prolonged conflict and boots on the ground, those are statements that give people PTSD in this country and for good reason. And you listen to Keir Starmer, the UK prime minister, speaking about this yesterday. He may have gotten himself out of all of the Epstein trouble that he was in with his defiant speech where he said, we're not going to fight your illegal war with you. You know, France is out there. Macron comes out, says, we're going to be building up our nuclear arsenal and we're not going to even tell you exactly what we're doing. Used to be something more transparent. Spain kicked us out of their bases that we were using. And I think two things are important. So Dan Kane, General Dan Kane, who's the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, there was a lot of reporting in the last week that he was really nervous about doing something and that we were underestimating the Iranian pushback that we were going to see. And it seems like he was completely right. Right. So if the US or if Israel thought that the IRGC or whatever remained of it were going to, you know, scuttle right to the negotiating table afterwards, they were sorrow mistaken. And reporting shows that Iran feels like they can dig in for 60 to 90 days, frankly. And not only are we going to deplete our own arsenal, all of our Gulf state partners need backup from us. They need money and weapons to keep doing this, because Iran is firing everywhere, you know, to countries that they don't get along with, but some that they actually have a pretty decent working relationship or peaceful coexistence to some degree. So I think that that is a really huge problem here. And then there is the issue of which is something, you know, we talk about a lot, you know, the relationship with the US And Israel. And I saw Bibi was on Hannity last night. He said, you know, hogwash to the idea that this is going to be a prolonged conflict or that, that they pushed us into it. And I don't see any other way to read it. I don't think that makes me anti Israel or not a Zionist or any of that. It just seems like the facts on the ground based on what the secretary of state and Mark Warner, the vice chair of intel on the Democratic side came out and confirmed that he said I extremely pro Israel, but this is a new frontier. If we are shaping foreign policy based upon their timetables and they just blew up right before we jumped on here, there was a meeting, I think 88 people to select the new head of the IRGC who's going to become the new ayatollah, I guess. And Israel blew that up. So Israel is going about their business and they live in an existential threat scenario right every day from Iran. And, and I understand that, but we are now in bed together in a way that is making people who are supportive of Israel very uncomfortable. And I worry that it, it's going to feed a vicious cycle and degeneration of U S Israeli relations. We've already seen it obviously on the Democratic side it's now people are more sympathetic with the Palestinians than the Israelis. For the first time in history the same thing is going on in the kind of America first wing of the repub party and it's not what I expected, I guess, and I don't want to be naive, but hearing that, like you said coming out of Rubio's mouth was jarring to me.

A (14:29)

They sound very defensive and like all of a sudden they're on their heels. And the response, typically they say Republicans and fall in line. They're just falling out of love right now. So some Republican responses. Senator Chuck Grassley on X. President Trump gave Iran plenty of negotiable opportunity. I don't know what that means. Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky on X. This is not America first. When Congress reconvenes, I will work with Representative Ro Khanna to force a congressional vote on war with Iran. You know, if they just, if they had said we see an opportunity to vastly diminish the kinetic capability and restore which likely decreases chaos and terrorism and increases the likelihood of the Iranian people being able to choose its leaders or bring stability to the Middle east, they could have left it at that and created an off ramp. But my understanding is in the last four days we've seen I'm willing to put boots on the ground. Well, of course, don't be stupid. It's not going to be boots on the ground. We want regime Change, no, not necessarily regime change. And now it feels like they're on their heels saying with these four objectives they've outlined, which quite frankly they could say they've already achieved and leave tomorrow, it feels as if they're setting themselves up for the ability to declare victory and leave, which I would argue is not the right message to be sending to the Islamic Republic right now. That, okay, we're getting shit, we had our macho photo moment, we're going to be out soon and we're going to declare victory. Because basically if either of the Islamic Republic, I would just be saying, oh, okay, they're already. The core competence of the Russian people is they will lose a million people and still keep fighting. And I say this with some admiration. We lost, I think 400,000 people in World War II. The Russians lost 20 million and they would have kept fighting if they needed to. We do not have the same endurance or willingness to suffer. And that's good in some ways and bad in others. But it feels already as if the administration is on their heels and in my view sending kind of signals of weakness, basically saying, all right, we're looking, we are already looking for an off ramp as opposed to. If they just said we are here to so vastly diminish the nuclear and kinetic capabilities of Iran that they are no longer a short or medium term threat in the region and have absolutely no hopes of ever rebuilding their nuclear program, they would at least have been consistent and created an open ended opportunity to say, no, we're not sure when we're going to leave. And I think they would have gotten more people on board. They come across as really, in my opinion, incompetent, weak, inconsistent. The one thing I would like more discussion on is that my sense is there's been a huge strategic blunder here on the part of the Iranians by attacking essentially all of their neighbors. And basically the attitude is you're either with us, you're against us, so if you aren't going to defend us, we're going to attack you. And a lot of the attacks, in my opinion, while they make for dramatic video, have been more. I mean, they went after the largest refinery in Saudi Arabia, but Saudi Arabia has its own armaments. To me it seems that was a very dumb move that they had an opportunity to create a wedge in between the Gulf states and America. And instead what they've done essentially done is isolated themselves. And what's interesting is that the markets appear to be saying commodities markets, silver spiked, oil spiked. It's already coming down Because I think the market is basically saying, interpreting America's comments is they're looking for an off ramp. They're looking for an excuse to say declare victory and leave and that it'll be business back to usual pretty soon, including the fact that the IRGC will not fall, that the Straits of Hormuz will be open again, that this is not going to be a long term war.

B (18:33)

Is it a taco?

A (18:35)

Oh, that's actually the right. Isn't that, that is exactly the right description. I hadn't thought of that. Say more about what you mean there.

B (18:42)

Well, I mean, I'm not queen of the tacos. I know it was a British journalist who did it, who said, it's Robert Armstrong.

A (18:48)

He's not British, he's American. He works for the ft. Oh, that's a British newspaper.

B (18:51)

American.

A (18:52)

Yep. Stands for Trump always chickens out.

B (18:55)

Right. Trump always chickens out. I mean, there are, I hate to use that for analysis because there are six dead American service members and there are, I think 115 dead innocent Iranians from a strike there on a school. Dozens of schoolchildren dead. So I'm not trying to minimize any of that. It's not like when Trump says, I'm taking Greenland tomorrow and then just sits there and watches, you know, TV and drinks Diet Coke. But if we are, which the reporting indicates looking for an off ramp, which would come in the form of some sort of diplomatic negotiation that we had the opportunity to do over the last several weeks and there is, you know, significant reporting that there were breakthroughs, at least on the precipice, and that it is now Iran that is pulling back and saying, you don't get to get out of here in five seconds or less. Right. Like we can go longer than you think. That's 60 to 90 days. I think that's exactly right in looking for the off ramp. This is the most extreme foreign policy example of what Trump has done, you know, with tariffs, for instance, or various threats. So anyway, I don't know if it fits in that category, but it feels a little taco y to me.

A (20:09)

Well, also withdrawing from the jcpoa. And it was clear now that all these talks, using the nation of Oman to act as mediators, that that was all just a head fake. That was all bullshit. And the problem with tearing up agreements from previous administrations and also not entering into good faith negotiations, and I think the Iranians and most of the people in the Gulf would argue that those negotiations were a total head fake. What's your credibility around restarting negotiations again, or what is the paper you can get parties to agree to worth the paper it's written on? So, you know, I don't think we come across as steadfast. I don't think we come across as a committed. I think we look Republicans immediately when there's pushback from Republicans. And it looks as if the Trump administration is panicking and didn't anticipate it and is already trying to create off ramps. And if I'm the irgc, I'm like, oh, they're blinking already. After, after, you know, just 72 hours, they're blinking and all we got to do is hunker down and it's back to business as usual.

B (21:13)

Well, they know we weren't prepared because we didn't even make plans to get Americans out of harm's way. So they know that we're on the back foot, at least, you know, on that level.

A (21:24)

All right. Let's take a quick break. Stay with us. Welcome back. Quickly, we're going to review Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's Capitol Hill testimony today. Facing lawmakers for the first time since the killing of Alex Preddy in Minnesota. She was grilled by both parties over DHS enforcement tactics, detention policy spending, and whether department funding lapse is weakening counterterrorism efforts after US Strikes on Iran. Let's watch this exchange between her and Senator Amy Klobuchar.

B (21:53)

We were relying in the hours after that incident that was so horrific on information we were getting from the ground. You wanted to say to the parents or to the family of Renee Good, after you called them domestic terrorists, imagine what they have gone through in the loss of their son and the loss of their family members. But how about specifically calling them domestic terrorists without any evidence of that, Sir, Ma', am, I did not call him a domestic terrorist. I said it appeared to be an incident of, I think the parents saw

A (22:27)

it for what it was.

B (22:30)

I mean, she's awful. She's ghoulish, she's awful. I've gendered this before. I'm going to gender it again. Watching a woman do this is worse to me than watching a man do it, especially a mother and a grandmother. And I don't know, I, I guess it all stems from the fact that Trump never apologizes. Every once in a while he says, you know, I didn't do that, but I wouldn't have, or something like that, like the ape video about the Obamas. But I really think she could have just said we shouldn't have used that language. And it's A tragedy that they're dead, because that's what, you know, Tom Holman, when he showed up, he's like, I wouldn't be here if mistakes weren't made. Republicans, you know, Senator Kennedy actually raked her over the coals on this and the $200 million that she spent on advertisements to essentially promote herself. He said, like, you just effectively promoted you. Like, it's not a sign of weakness to recognize reality and show you have a little bit of soul, and maybe it just gets. It gets you off the hot seat for five seconds, a little bit of reprieve, and then people can fan out with their talking points and say, you know, this is the stuff we really want to dig in on. And she recognized that a mistake was made when it comes to this.

A (23:51)

Yeah. So I always like to think of the person who's in the room, but not in the room. I think probably the reason we bombed Iran. And who is in the room giving these testimonies, whether it's Director Patel or Secretary Noem, you know, who's in the room that's not in the room is Roy Cohn. Roy Cohn is President Trump's sort of ideological mentor. And Roy Cohn's attitude was, interrupt, attack. Never give an inch, never admit defeat, never say you're sorry. Double down, double down. Attack, attack, attack. And that's what he wants. He wants Secretary Noem interrupting the senators. Look at the complexion and the demeanor and the decorum, his appointees and who they're all playing to a party of one. What does he want? Interrupt, be an asshole, accuse them of shit, call them failed lawyers, never admit you're wrong. And it is so incredibly unproductive. It also really damages our brand. It makes us look like assholes. It makes a mockery of our elected leaders and the Senate, these gatherings. It makes them look like food, fights. They just cheapen everything. And also, I think a lot of us who feel very disturbed by Trump, like rattled more than we've been rattled before. And I think there's a lot of us had kind of a last straw moment. My last straw moment was absolutely when Secretary Noem described an ICU nurse taking care of veterans as a domestic terrorist. I just thought. And brandishing a weapon with plans with an intent to massacre federal agents. I just thought. I remember when I saw it and I read it, I couldn't find anyone to complain to, and it was too late. It was in the morning here, so it was like three in the morning for all of my progressive friends in New York that I could Call. I think that one moment, that was like the low point. That was just, okay, it has gone too far. And Senators Murkowski, Thom Tillis have all come out and actively asked for her resignation. And then all of this, like, bang, bus in the sky bullshit where she appears to be flying around on a $70 million plane with her private cabin. Yeah, I mean, it really is a South park episode. It's so obvious. Well, I think it's obvious if you think about crisis management. It's acknowledged the issue. Yeah, this was a tragedy. I take responsibility. Top guy gal needs to take responsibility and overcorrect and say, I apologize, this was wrong. And we're putting in place protocols and safeguards to make sure that good people are not. That we can ensure she can even say, and that the good people of ICE aren't put in situations that end up with murdered people and that someone exercising their First Amendment rights is not killed. I'm personally committed to making sure this doesn't happen again. But instead, we have a presence like, no double down. Never admit you're wrong, but I think there's few people that are more happy about our strikes in Iran right now than Secretary Noemi. She does not want a lot of attention on her testimony because she knew it was gonna be rough. But I'll be curious if the calls for her resignation after today increase. Have you heard anything from people, you know, around the general sense or evaluation of her testimony?

B (27:15)

Well, I think the who is gonna go is such a moving target, depending on the bad news of the day. Cuz we were talking after Alex Preddy and Renee Goode were murdered. Like, it has to be Christy Dom, you know, then it shifted gears where, like, oh, Pam Bondi was completely insane. Lutnick, you know, the. The photo in the Epstein files of him with Epstein and three men. Not with his nannies, his kids and his children, as he said, but just walking around in his holiday best. And I think it was Politico reported that President Trump has confronted him about how much his sons are profiting, how much money they're making during the Trump administration. And I don't know, only my kids, right, are the ones that should be able to make money off of this. So I thought Lutnick could be in there. And apparently he was very unhappy with Cash Patel's behavior in Milan. And I'm not surprised because Trump is sober, right? He doesn't even drink. So I think the idea of the FBI director, you know, crushing beers, behaving so unprofessionally stuck out to him. And it was at least reported that he was upset about the jet travel, too. So, you know, you can go in any direction, which I think means no one is going anywhere. And on that note.

A (28:25)

Yes.

B (28:26)

Yeah.

A (28:26)

All right, before we go, if you're watching us on YouTube, make sure you hit subscribe. As a reminder, Raging Moderates is now five days a week, with new episodes dropping every weekday evening on YouTube, Apple, podcasts, Spotify, and everywhere else. That's all for this episode. Thank you for listening. We'll see you on Thursday, Josh.

B (28:43)

Yeah, I'll see you later,

A (28:49)

Sam.