Mark Polymoropoulos (3:41)

Board search, search.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (3:43)

It's secure. Yeah, I knew the ss,

Jonathan Hackett (3:48)

so a

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (3:48)

lot happening Straight or her moves is still is mined, at least partially. So it's kind of a huge clusterfuck. And let's. I'd love for you guys to, you know, give us some clarity on what's going on and what to expect. Make you go first. Age before beauty. Sorry, that was a joke.

Mark Polymoropoulos (4:09)

First a cool VBSS story since we talked about the Greeks. We actually trained the Greek seals in VBSs. And we literally went, you know, like those. Those cruise. Those passenger ships that go to all the islands. We just hit those non stop until we got to the island that we wanted to go to, and then we just pull into the island, sit out on the beach, drink wine, eat, you know, calamari and all that stuff. And man, that was glorious. I don't think it's as sexy or cool for the guys that are doing this for real. Okay, so we're talking about Iran again. You know, I'd start with this. You know, we do need to get to a point where the US can be successful on this. We've talked about this a lot, and I think we have accomplished some of our military objectives. We never should have used the regime change as an objective. Clearly, we do have probably, and I think Jonathan and Mark can go into detail on this. I think we probably have a more hardline regime right now than we did before the war started. And I think we just need to accept that that's what it is. We have made strides against their ballistic missile program, which was somewhat of a shield for their nuclear program. We have made some strides against their suicide drones. But I'd be too. I'd be careful from a messaging point of view of overstating that, because clearly they're going to rebuild it. And if they're back to where they were in a year, those military objectives are not going to look as significant as they do right now. So. And then, of course, the question is, how do we deal with the top priority, which is the nuclear ambitions of Iran, which probably would mean recovering the 440kg of highly enriched uranium. But it's important to point out they have about 10 tons of enriched uranium, not to that level, but. But the best way to ensure that they don't try to get a nuclear program is make it completely against their interest to have a nuclear program, which means a negotiated nuclear agreement that provides them benefit. Sanctions relief, of course, being the primary, that has complete visibility. So the IAEA has the ability to. To ensure that they're not developing nuclear weapons. But to, to say that we're going to just mow the grass, so to speak, which I'm not necessarily opposed to, but I just don't think it's practical. So I think we should put all our eggs into, or not all of them, but a majority of our eggs into the diplomatic basket to try to get there. And yes, it has to be better than the 2015 agreement for political reasons. Are people really going to ask why we elected to pull out of that just to get back to the same agreement? And it does have to address the ballistic missiles in some capacity, at least restrictions on the Strait of Hormuz, Obviously that was open before we started, so we can't leave it worse off. They've found their major pressure point, and it is a pressure point. We can all acknowledge that. And we've tried to counter it with the blockade. I do believe that's where the US Is going to double down. I don't think we want to insert ground forces into this conflict for multiple reasons. One, there's really no exit strategy. If we do, it's only escalatory. So we're going to try to push hard on the blockade. And I do think it's having an effect. It just, I guess the next step is what will Iran do to try to break it or they start attacking their neighbors again while they get the Houthis to try to obstruct the Red Sea. Bob Almendev? Don't know. I do. I mean, it's just the way it is. The way we're negotiating publicly, I find it to be highly ineffective at the negotiation process itself. Every time we say things like, well, we really don't care, this could last forever, it just screams, we really do care. We don't want this to last forever. You're basically just telling the Iranians over and over and over again that if they can outlast us that they'll be successful. It's clearly an indicator to me that we're highlighting what is the most concerning to us, other than that maybe a bifurcated process where we can get to a negotiated end to the war and then start the long term negotiated process to get to a new nuclear agreement. It seems like we're thinking this is all going to happen at once and it took two years to get to the original agreement. We're not going to send two guys with no experience over there and both simultaneously end the war and come up with JCPO POA 2.0. It's just very unlikely to happen. And the more we think it's going to happen, the more we're going to, I think, fall short. And when we do get to the long term negotiating process, we need to bring in experts, nuclear experts, couriers from the military, State Department intelligence community to be successful and to be long term. And I think we're going to have to convince the Iranians that we're not just going to pull out of the agreement in three years because the next president doesn't like President Trump or what's the point? I mean, they might be wondering why are we even bothering this? Because we're not going to get a treaty. We're only going to get an executive order level thing. So even if they do promise never to attack us again, it's not going to matter because the current president can't bind the future president and things like that. So we're going to have to address all these issues. But ultimately it's worth it if we can get to a new agreement that stabilizes the Middle east, which of course is in our own interest as well as our partners in the Middle East. And then there's all the other issues going on with manufacturing and defense industrial complex in the United States being able to keep up with this. We're getting very short on precision strike munitions interceptors. Our allies are now wondering whether we are the right provider of said weapons because we're not keeping up with our obligations based on our actions and deciding to go to war. So that that's a bigger broader issue, but it's a real issue from people that are reaching out to me, from our European partners, so I'll stop there. And I don't know if we're going to talk about the event last night, but Iran's obviously the major issue.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (11:16)

Who wants it?

Mick Mulroy (11:16)

I can talk about the Iran politics if you want a little bit, because I think a lot of outsiders don't understand kind of the different camps that exist domestically with Iranian politics. And you've seen on social media, you know, there's indications that there are disagree between the different camps within the regime, which to some may be surprising or a little bit obscure to understand. And it's because we don't often talk about domestic politics in Iran. Instead, we just talk about Iran, the threat, and don't kind of go deeper than that. And there's four different camps. There's moderates, reformists, pragmatists, and hardliners. And these kind of come up over the years, especially like 2009, when there was a contested election with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. And then the reformists. And the reformists probably won that election, but the hardliners said no. And so Ahmadinejad became the president again. That's why There was the 2009 Green Revolution, because there was this disagreement between these two groups. And a lot of these protests that have come out have been a kind of symptom or a result of the disagreements between these groups that have existed since the revolution. So this isn't a new thing, but it's something that's important to understand, because when we're thinking about negotiating and when Trump says we don't know who we're negotiating with, it's actually partially true, because probably on the NSC side, we don't actually know who holds the power levers. Right now, it's most likely the hardliners, which is Ahmad Vahidi, who's in charge of the IRGC now. He was actually the original founder of Quds force back in 1988, when Quds Force wasn't even a military unit yet. It was an idea they had, and they started using it as this overseas. It was called Office of Liberation Movements, or olm. They actually sent that team to Bosnia, which was the first partner engagement Quds Force ever had, was to fight in Bosnia with the Muslim groups there that the US Was actually supporting, which is a very interesting time period in our history when we were actually aligned, similar to when we were fighting ISIS in 2016, when Iran was also hitting the same targets at that time. So Vahidi also was involved in the AMIA bombing in Argentina in the early 1990s and also the bombing of the Israeli embassy in the early 1990s, killing several hundred people. He was directly involved in the operational planning of that. So he's been a hardliner since day one, fought in the Iran Iraq war. And now he's. It seems as though he's kind of resting control of the internal levers of government, which means we can probably expect a more hardline position on not just diplomacy but also military operations. So he was one of the first founders of the Mosaic Doctrine. Like all these things we hear about that are negative about the regime, what they're doing, Vahedi is directly got his hand inside of that stuff. So when we think about, like, oh, was there a regime change? Whether there was or not, the person who has power now is worse than the person who had power before. It doesn't really matter how you define regime change. What matters is what are they doing? What are the effects of what they're doing? And I would estimate it's going to be worse because this guy is. He's not moderated by the Khamenei faction. That was the clerical faction that was kind of had this veneer of control. The IRGC has always had control, but now that veneer is kind of removed. And we can see it removed because Mohamed Bagr Galiboff, the speaker of Parliament, seems to be losing control over what's going on. And that control is being distributed over to those IRGC insiders, which are led by Vahidi. And I think that's important for listeners to understand, like, what's going on over there, because we may think that we're talking to Golubov, and Golubov is leading the country because he's a speaker of Parliament, but he actually only controls a small percentage now of the decision making that's going on in the country.

Jonathan Hackett (14:35)

So one of the things that I think is perhaps this is conventional wisdom, but, I mean, no one seems to think that a resumption of military activity is in either side's interest. Clearly, President Trump does not want to do this. He wants this to wind down in some fashion. I don't think the Pentagon wants any part of this whatsoever, because what is actually left to do when you start talking about the ground options? I'm sure there's opposition within DoD on this. And Iran doesn't get anything about resumption of military activity because they're getting thumped. I think that I've talked about this fascination. We have of military math and the impression impressive press briefings. But it turns out that all those impressive press briefings is not what the Defense Intelligence Agency is actually reporting when they said there's still significant percentages of drones and launchers for ballistic missiles. And so perhaps the Iranian military has not been degraded. There was a report yesterday I saw that actually an Iranian F5 launched an attack in the Gulf. And so, but, so let's just kind of go with that notion of. And I'm just going to say something's a little bit different. You guys were awesome, what you said. But the notion is we don't want to resume military activity, but the negotiations aren't really going anywhere. So what happens is this just kind of everyone does nothing. The blockade continues, the strait is closed in some fashion, and it's just this kind of. What do you call it? It's a battle of time in terms of economic pain. But I guess one of the questions I have is, will the United States or Israel at some point make a determination, Again, for reasons that I'm not sure I agree with, that resuming attacks on Iran is actually in our interest. And again, you know, what does that mean? And, and there is the notion of signal versus noise, signal meaning actually movement of assets, and movement of assets suggests. And again, you guys see the same airflow on open source stuff is still moving towards the region. We have the third aircraft carrier battle group there. I guess the, the second MU is or has arrived or is about to. And so, you know, it's not like they're withdrawing forces. We are adding now. This might be, you know, planned in advance already, but it is kind of a strange situation. Is that really. I mean, if you think about it, you know, so Vice President Vance didn't go, didn't hop on a plane. I don't. I think President Trump was probably correct not to send him because the Iranians certainly could have humiliated us with this. But the Iranian foreign minister, I guess, has said he might come back now to Islamabad to continue some type of talks. And so we're in this weird situation. Nothing is really happening. I mean, we're actually doing a podcast now on a lot of nothing. Some stuff's happened, but not a lot of big moving parts. But then there's this thing hanging over us in terms of the military opposition. And I do think the Iranians haven't kind of unleashed what they could in terms of asymmetric warfare. Maybe they have and we've stopped cyber attacks. Maybe we have. You know, the US IC and the Israeli IC have stopped kind of the Iranian terrorist apparatus overseas, but I think they could do a lot more and they've chosen not to. And so I guess the question for you guys after my little soliloquy there is, do you think actually it's possible that military activities. Best thing that could happen. Well, the best thing that could happen would be a really good diplomatic agreement. Mick, as you said, aside from that, maybe just this kind of strange status quo we're sitting at now of nothing is preferable to resumption of military activity. What are your guys thoughts?

Mick Mulroy (18:05)

I think Medvedev in Russia said it in an interesting way that the Straits of Hormuz are the new nuclear weapon for Iran, which means there's going to be a lot of activity happening outside the straits to try to affect the straits without touching the straits, which if we're using that framework to think about what is the straits in terms of the Iranian mind right now, they don't want to disrupt what's going on because it's benefiting them because this is a bargaining chip that they don't want to let go of. And I think neither side knew before the conflict started just how powerful this lever would become during the conflict. And now Iran is realizing that we don't want to let go of this thing because now this is all we've got left, especially after all the strikes have degraded things within the country. So they're looking at this point as a non degraded, appreciable asset that they don't want to let go of. And the reason I mentioned that is because I'm looking at Lebanon and think about what's going on with this meeting between President Aoun and Netanyahu in D.C. which is very historic. If people don't know, since 1982, there has not been a meeting between a Lebanese leader and an Israeli leader. And if you've been to south Lebanon, there are signs that point south to Palestine and they don't have signs that point to Israel because Lebanon doesn't recognize Israel as a country. They recognize it as Palestine. If you go into the museum in Beirut, there's maps, you know, the history museum, there are maps of Palestine today and it's all Israel, you know. So the fact that these two leaders are meeting is a very important component of this larger negotiation where if we can break off the Lebanese component from the main Iran theater component, at least from from the military planning perspective, Iran's going to lose its ability to have a surrogate force in Hezbollah. If that's true, because what will probably happen is the Lebanese armed forces and the IDF will start to work together in south Lebanon to suppress Hezbollah, which is kind of a thing that has never been discussed in the past because we had the UN Security Council resolution in the south setting up the blue line to kind of keep the status quo between Israel and Lebanon since the 2000 withdrawal. It's possible that that could shift a little bit where the Lebanese and the Israelis begin suppressing Hezbollah. And that would mean the regime would only have really its Iraqi and Houthi forces. That could actually be a threat in the region. And there could be this kind of domino effect where first we suppress Hezbollah to. To a neutral degree, so they can't do anything to neuter them, and then we've got the Houthis kind of suppressed in the Red Sea area, which we generally do. And then the only threat, really, is that western portion, the Iraqi portion. And perhaps by taking out these dominoes, now you just have a rump state of the IRGC that's been reduced significantly anyway, and maybe that's the direction that we might be moving in based on how we're doing these negotiations with Lebanon.

Jonathan Hackett (20:36)

But, John, do you see. Again, let's go. So I think that's. I mean, you know, everyone's going to root for this to actually work. You know, those of us who have been critics of the administration, I think on this note, in terms of kind of pushing the Israelis and Lebanese together, everyone is very supportive of that. I certainly am. But what about the notion. I mean, so let's. Let's put both of you guys put your DoD hats back on. Do you think DoD wants any part of resuming military activity against Iran? And, you know. And what would that actually entail?

Mick Mulroy (21:05)

Well, can we keep doing an air campaign only? That's the real question. And if the answer is yes, I think there might be more support for it. But if the answer is no, I think there's a lot of resistance for many different reasons, not just moral reasons, but also operational and quantitative reasons about how much do we have left, how much can we put there, how much can we sustain and maintain over time? And I think they're looking at that and they're looking at the terrain and how difficult the rescue operation was. How much asset was required to get those two pilots out was a lot. And if we can expect more downed pilots, we can expect more harmed forces and isolated persons if we do a ground incursion. And I don't think the DoD is willing to sustain that, or maybe they will if they have to. I don't think they want to.

Jonathan Hackett (21:48)

Nick, what do you think?

Mark Polymoropoulos (21:48)

Well, they will if they have to, but it's a global fighting force and it's designed to be such. And if we want to keep doing that, we can't expend everything on one area, especially if the gains don't out weigh the risks. So, I mean, a lot of these ballistic missiles, for example, are in these areas that are very difficult to reach, even with our most penetrating massive ordinant penetrators. So what do we gain from it? I would argue not that much. But of course, the military planners know more than I do because they see, they're seeing the intel, but everything I'm hearing is they don't want to start it. Not necessarily because they want the war to end, although I think they do. It's just they don't. We don't gain that much for restarting the air war. So, no, I don't think the Pentagon thinks that's the way to go. To Jonathan's point, I do think that's the way to go. And I think we are going there whether it's planned or not, in the sense that the three major pillars, nuclear ambitions, proxy forces and ballistic missiles, the proxy forces have been degraded pretty substantially. If you look at Hezbollah and obviously Hamas, the two remaining are still an issue. But we should double down on enhancing the relationship between the Lebanese armed forces and the Lebanese government and Israel and us. Because if we can remove that Hezbollah issue, it'll never be completely eradicated. So we have to set reasonable expectations, but reduce it to the point where it's not a threat to Israel or a significant one and it's not something that Iran can use for its strategic purposes, that's a big win. If we can get to a nuclear agreement that we're confident that they won't actually get to a nuclear weapon, that's a big win. And guess what if we can't. I imagine if you just listen to Jonathan's discussion about the new regime, all of them are going to want a nuclear weapon. So we're going to have to get to a place where they don't want it. And right now they do want it. If there was hesitation before, I imagine, at least philosophically, right now they're like, well, look at what's happening to us. Look what's happening to North Korea. So the two rogue states, there's your examples. So I imagine all of the IRGC people were pushing the former supreme leader to get a nuclear weapon or is like told You Right. So we're going to have to address that immediately because now the incentive is definitely there. We don't want them to want that. That's the second pillar. And then the ballistic missiles, of course that could be tied. I mean, there could be restrictions. We're never going to have them eliminate it because they need it for their national defense. But let's do it in a way that it's regionally makes sense, but not to become a threat, you know, outside of the region and to the level where it could actually protect a nuclear program. So to Jonathan's term, if it's a rump state in Iran that essentially regardless of their intent, is not threatening their region, is not using proxy forces, is not destabilizing the Middle east, then that is a good place to end. And if we can focus on that, that would be a win. And I'm looking for a win for the United States. Not like it's a sports event, but like we did this for a reason. We need to be successful strategically. And right now it can go either way. I really could. The other point Mark, like this could be a stalemate for a long time because neither side wants to push the military button again and neither side seems to be willing to compromise, at least publicly on the diplomatic. So we could have this long dragged out blocking of the strait for the world's, you know, energy supply and other important material and the blocking of the strait from our perspective for the Iranians. And I don't know what that's going to do long term for, you know, the global economy, but it's got to be negative. So we're going to have to figure out how to break that impasse. But right now we could be set for a long period of time of that. Like we could be talking about this, you know, to Christmas here on eyes on, like what's going to happen next other than the blockade of the blockade. So hopefully we can convince the Iranians legitimately that it's in their interest to have a nuclear agreement and end the war in terms that are still amenable to the US Government.

Jonathan Hackett (26:30)

It'll be interesting to see on that, Nick, because I think that, you know, if that is to be the case, there will have to be compromise not only on, on the Iranian part, but on the United States part. And Trump has pursued in public a maximalist position. He's kind of egged on by the Lindsey Graham's of the world and this kind of the kind of the GOP leaning kind of pro Israel folks on the Right. The freedom of defense and democracy, folks. And it's all 100% maximalist, but that's not the way diplomatic agreements get signed. So I think that one thing that might constrain Trump, and this is not a good thing, is that an agreement in which, you know, where, where there's going to be some type of, you know, moratorium on enrichment in uranium, whether it's 10 years, 15 years, whatever, which is the only way this actually works. I think because of the national pride piece for the, for the Iranians, that might not be enough to satisfy kind of some of the right wing kind of supporters behind Trump and the Lindsey Grahams of the world who are going to be howling over this. So I think politically it'll be interesting to see how Trump, I don't think he cares. He doesn't believe in anything. He would, you know, come to agreement, but he has boxed himself in politically on this. And I guess one of the things that you, the other thing to kind of note, politics is of course involved in this. And, you know, maybe he's made an assessment that the Republicans are going to lose in the midterm.

Danielle Robaix (27:55)

This is Danielle Robaix from bookmarked by Reese's Book Club. Nothing compares to the anticipation of something new. A new start, a new year, a new home, or a new car. When it's time to get a new car, where do you start? Car shopping can honestly be a little overwhelming. But it should be fun. Buying your next car should be exciting. And it can be if you remember one thing. Cars.com cars.com has the tools and expert advice to help you figure out what vehicle is right for you. Their advanced search filters allow you to explore 2 million new and used cars so that you can find the perfect car. The site is so easy to use. Looking for an electric vehicle with a third row and leather seats for easy cleanup. Cars.com has you covered. A variety of tools and badges are used to help shoppers understand the price of a vehicle and find the best deal. And every review is written by a real person reflecting a real life experience. So don't take any chances. Do car shopping the easy way. Start your search with cars.com where to next?

Blue Square Alliance Advertiser (28:58)

Here's a thought that shouldn't be controversial. You can think someone is completely wrong and still not hate them. I know. Wild. But somehow we've turned disagreement into a personality and hate into something people are way too comfortable with. And it's not just happening in one place. Hate is rising across communities in different ways. And Jewish communities are getting hit especially hard right now. And hate doesn't just stay in one lane, it spreads. So even if you think this isn't your issue, give it a minute. You don't have to agree with people, you just have to decide you're not okay with hate. That's it. The blue square is a simple way to say that out loud. Go to bluesquarealliance.org, get a pin, share it or don't, but at least don't pretend this isn't happening.

Spin Quest Advertiser (29:38)

Forget whatever plans you have this weekend, because you're staying at home and playing on spinquest. And there's never been a better time to sign up than right now. New users get $30 coin packs for just $10. All the table games you love, with hundreds of slot games and real cash Prizes. That's at spinquest.com S P I N Q U E-S-T.com Spinquest is a free

Spin Quest Advertiser (30:01)

to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

Jonathan Hackett (30:08)

Regardless of what he does, so he will, he's okay with economic pain. I mean, you know, if you want a legacy defining agreement, which might be acceptable in terms of constraints on the Iranian nuclear program, you know, that's. And it might take that, this notion of kind of the battle of time, and maybe Trump's like, okay, we're going to do this and it's going to take a while because remember, he said at one point, he said it's indefinite, the cease fire. Then he said three to five days. Now it's back to kind of indefinite again. You know, this, all this will trigger D right now because I'm going to quote an Israeli, some Israeli officials, because anytime you mention Israel, D gets all shaky and starts kind of our chat erupts into his diatribe against Bibi.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (30:52)

But it's not just mine, not just me in the chat. There's other people in the chat who are not fans.

Jonathan Hackett (30:58)

No, that's true. But ultimately, I think the quote was, and I've used it too much on tv, I can't use this anymore. An Israeli official said, look, if you take all of Trump's quotes about these, about everything from truth, social or oppressors, and you throw it into ChatGPT, ChatGPT will implode because he's all over the place on everything. So, you know, is it extended? Is it indefinite? No. Is it a deadline? Is it two weeks? I mean, it's just. And again, this is diplomacy based on true social or three o' clock in the morning. Posting the only. I mean, what happened last night with the White House Correspondents Dinner was something certainly worthy to talk about and almost a potentially awful event. But I guess what we haven't heard from Trump over the last 24 hours is anything on Iran other than JD Vance not going to Islamabad. So, you know, the best thing that they could do is take his phone away so he can't tweet about Iran. But going back to kind of my. It's the idea of is this Trump's kind of decision was Venezuela, Iran and then Cuba going to be his legacy, politics be damned. We're going to have $5 gallons of gas, but I'm going to be the one who took down the Iranians running nuclear program, maybe. And then, and then, and because maybe they have it baked in that the Republicans lose the House and maybe even the Senate anyhow, regardless. So kind of interesting to think about.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (32:19)

Yeah.

Mark Polymoropoulos (32:19)

And we're coming up close. Closer and closer to 60 days. Right. So what do we expect to happen when, I mean, under the War Powers Act, Congress is supposed to act at 60 days to continue or it's supposed to, you have, what, 30 days to start withdrawing forces, which I'm not sure exactly what means, because you don't have to withdraw from a whole region of the world. But the point being the Congress needs to act for it to continue. And maybe that's another factor that Iran's looking at. And if they don't, what's going to happen? So if Congress doesn't act under the act, and correct me if I'm wrong, law student, then it's supposed, then it's essentially over. We're supposed to stop combat operations. So if they don't act, then that's going to be a constitutional issue, which I assume may 1st. There you go. And it's about time that the Supreme Court decides this issue. How this isn't decided yet is beyond me. No matter where you stand on it. The idea that the most important thing a government does is the decision to go to war, and it's clearly spelled out in the Constitution. Article one, obviously, with the power to declare war for Congress and the commander in Chief for Article 2. And it's still, we still don't have a definitive statement by the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of an act that's been around since the early 70s is just baffling to me. Maybe you guys should talk about that at Yale.

Mick Mulroy (33:58)

Yeah, well, actually, we did. I'm in my international law class and we talk about it every week. We come in there's like something new happened over the weekend to talk about how it's changed the way that we're supposed to do things. But if you put the red head

Mark Polymoropoulos (34:08)

on, what would the presser say about say about the act?

Mick Mulroy (34:12)

The thing is like the way that the government has been interpreting its own Office of Legal Counsel decisions, which is the office that makes decisions for the executive branch to say like this thing is legal and then everyone in the executive branch can follow that thing as if it's legal, which is like the torture program, for example, had an OLC memo saying we can do waterboarding, for example. And then people are kind of covered for liability purposes under the executive branch. And this, what I would mention the red hat part of it because what's happening in the Office of Legal Counsel right now is they're saying, okay, if Congress does say we can't do this, how else can we describe what we're doing in a way that can still be allowed? So what if I'm, if I'm in their office and I'm thinking that I'm going to immediately look at authorization for use of military force for Iraq and that's what they used in 2000, in 2020 January, when we killed Qasem Soleimani, we used the AUMF for the Iraq war and it passed muster. And they're going to say we already passed muster on at once. We have precedent that we are allowed to continue striking Iranian targets using the aumf. We're going to keep doing that now and we're going to say it's self defense. And if you saw that State Department message that came out a couple of days ago saying the US Is acting in self defense of itself and Israel d put in your earplugs. We've already set kind of the groundwork for us to come up and make a justification that, oh, we're not doing an offensive war. This is a defensive conflict against Iran underneath the aumf. And that's why we're allowed to continue doing this. We don't even need the 1973 War Powers Resolution because we're in self defense right now. We're under attack. It's not that we're attacking. So if I was in their office, that's probably the conversation that's going on right now. How do we draft a memo like that to allow people to continue regardless of what Congress does? But probably Congress won't do anything because they already have had an opportunity to do something and they haven't done it.

Jonathan Hackett (35:58)

And you know, one of the things on this too is that where the argument, the partisan argument falls apart is, of course, the Democrats have, you know, Democratic presidents have ignored the War Powers act just as well.

Mark Polymoropoulos (36:12)

Yeah, yeah. This isn't a partisan thing.

Jonathan Hackett (36:13)

Yeah. So, I mean, that would be an argument for someone who actually cares about the Constitution, I mean, or cares about the kind of the rule of law and, and constraints and 3, 3 core equal branches of government to say on either side of the aisle, hey, you know, Congress has to get involved here because, you know, it's just like so many other things this administration is doing and Trump is doing against the norms. You got to be careful because if it becomes kind of regularized, the next, the next president comes from the other party is going to do all the same things. And so, you know, that's. But, but I don't, I mean, look, I don't know how you guys feel. I've totally lost all faith in Congress as an institution completely. And when you kind of going back to politics, politics, when you see Trump's approval ratings are in the 30s, it's a, you know, it certainly looks like there'll be a bloodbath, probably a bad term now, but you know, they'll lose significantly in the midterms. But you also, if you look at the support for Democrats in Congress, it's like in the teens. I mean, so people don't like Congress to begin with and for good reason because they, you know, we have incompetent, you know, dipshits.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (37:15)

They're useless. Yeah.

Jonathan Hackett (37:16)

I mean, the people who are actually running, you know, the powers of our government now never should be there. I'm sorry. And so, you know, Congress didn't do it, do its job. If you think, you know, you know, Pete Hegseth and RFK Jr and Tulsi Gabbard and Cash Patel are actually qualified. That's preposterous. And so, but, you know, but Congress has kind of given up on this. And so I don't think they're going to do anything. Mick, it's going to be interesting because there'll be some great op eds, even from the Wall Street Journal and from conservative institutions which are going to say, well, hold on a second. But I don't think they're going to do anything past the 60 day mark. I mean, Trump's blown by so many different norms anyhow, so why would this be any different than anything else? I think it's important for people to speak up on it, but I don't see anything changing.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (38:02)

Well, the fact that that's the argument that they're cooking up in the General Counsel's office is complete, like, utter, like, nonsense. Let's be honest. It's defensive war. That's crazy.

Mick Mulroy (38:16)

Was killed, though. I mean, the argument against the syllable,

Mark Polymoropoulos (38:18)

at least he was.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (38:19)

He was in Iraq, right?

Mick Mulroy (38:21)

Well, he was flying from Syria to Iraq. So they had already had the operation going before he was in Iraq. So they preemptively staged Advanced Force Operations and other things with TFO in the area that already had planned this thing like it's going to happen, you know, Is that defensive? I don't know.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (38:36)

But the hit happened in Iraq.

Mark Polymoropoulos (38:38)

Well, I mean that.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (38:39)

Right.

Mark Polymoropoulos (38:40)

Suleimani was responsible.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (38:41)

I could see there being a little bit. Go ahead. I'm sorry.

Mark Polymoropoulos (38:43)

To kill Americans.

Jonathan Hackett (38:45)

That was a CT option. Yeah, they used the CT that was more under CT as well. Because regardless if he was an Iranian military official, it was that he was also the head of a terrorist organization I think they used.

Mick Mulroy (38:55)

That's the thing you can say is IRGC is a US Designated terrorist organization. So you can continue using the CT exord. Instead of using Authorization for Use of Military Force or even the War Powers Resolution, you can say, no, this is a ctop and it's in international waters, by the way. So it's not even an issue of are we in the country? And maybe we have to pursue them into their country. Maybe, you know, hot pursuit. That's okay, right? Like, this is how it can be described.

Mark Polymoropoulos (39:19)

I mean, I don't obviously speak for the country, but I'm guessing that if you just spelled out the War Powers act plan, that most Americans would say yes. If you just took it out of, like, the current political situation and whether you're red or blue or neither, that if you said, hey, can the President just start an endless war and just keeps going on without Congress authorizing it. I'm guessing about 99% of America would say no. No. Right. I mean, because the current people, to be frank, that are in this war keep complaining about the. The war we just left that went on for 20 years. Right. So, like, it seems like we need to slap the table on just how this should go, regardless of the current situation or who you're affiliated with, say, do we literally not want Congress, which is the direct representation of the American people, to have no say in whether we continue war? And they don't get to opt out. They don't get to just say nothing or vote to not vote, which is what they're doing.

Jonathan Hackett (40:25)

Right. And I Think that, you know, I mean, Congress voting on this is a good thing that would actually. And so, like, so here's the other thing. Like, if this was kind of a normally functioning White House, you would say, okay, we need to make a justification to the American people and justification to Congress. We're going to engage tremendously on this. We've talked on this show before. There are legitimate reasons to actually undertake this operation. I know they haven't gotten it straight in terms of all the different objectives, but if they've done this and let's say Congress votes on it, the administration is in a hugely strengthened position because the other part of it too is. And there's no doubt, and you know, perhaps this is an interesting avenue as well, is the Iranians notice. I mean, you know, the Iranians have used kind of social media and trolling and all of this because they certainly see the divides in the United States and this exacerbates that. But let's say we had a congressional vote, the administration had done the right thing, and it passes. That actually puts the Iranians in a weaker position, Trump in a. In a better position politically. But more most importantly for us is we are in a better position vis a vis Iran, if you had that successful vote. But at this point, the other part of this now, maybe to throw in, to kind of go against everything I'm saying is that maybe we've gone so far and that they've done so little that actually this vote might not pass now. So maybe that's part of their calculation as well, because they flubbed the initial part of this. And that would be if there was a war powers resolution and it failed in Congress. That would be pretty damaging to our position at the negotiating table.

Mark Polymoropoulos (42:01)

It would be. Yeah, that's true. But that's part of being in a democracy, right? A constitutional democracy. Yeah.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (42:07)

I feel like our negotiating position is pretty shitty right now for being honest, because, I mean, we talked about the straight of Hormuz being de facto blocked, where, let's say, 5% of what usually comes out of it comes out of it. That's gonna have major. Let's say you mix that to, you know, Christmas. We're talking about this. That's a huge, major hit to the global economy, to oil prices and stuff like that. Like, maybe we're not feeling it that much right now in America. I mean, in the west coast they are, but, like, at some point, like, that's gonna. That bill's gonna come due.

Jonathan Hackett (42:42)

Cost me a hundred bucks to fill up my pickup truck. Yesterday I was shocked. Expensive gas is expensive now.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (42:49)

Yeah. So, I mean, I don't know if we're at a better spot, but then we were February 27th, to be honest, on the negotiation table. Negotiating table.

Jonathan Hackett (42:57)

Hey, can I, can I just mention that. Oh, sorry, go ahead.

Mick Mulroy (43:00)

Jonathan, I was just gonna mention, with the Straits, like the whole thing, we're gonna keep talking about the straits. The Straits. Well, I just wanna zoom into what happened the last 48 hours in the Straits, the number of transits that went through. So there was one Russian yacht owned by an oligarch that passed through unmolested. There were four Omani vessels that passed through one ferry, which is normal, like local traffic, and then two Iranian shadow fleet tankers passed through. One an Iranian owned vessel and one a non Iranian owned vessel. That's all that passed through. So 25% of the eight vessels that went through in the last 48 hours were Iran linked vessels and one was a Russian oligarch. So to me it's like, okay, how actually controlled is this and how are we describing it in the west versus what's actually happening on the ground? It's just a question mark.

Mark Polymoropoulos (43:42)

We didn't stop the Iranian vessel.

Jonathan Hackett (43:44)

Yeah, it's confusing because you have these, these, and I don't have it up. Now there's something on X, which is like a vessel tracker that seems to be reputable and nonpartisan. And you look at that and you're like, well, stuff is getting through, but then DoD is announcing it's not. So it is kind of confusing on what's, what's happening. But one question I have for you guys, and I think it's important, is what the Trump administration, what Trump himself has been saying over the last, what, three or four days, perhaps he's talking about these divisions within Iran and it is potentially significant, you know, and I guess that brings up the idea, or to me it did in terms of our intel collection, you know, do you think this is because Trump is actually, you know, finally listening to or receiving intelligence briefings that, hey, this is what's happening, you know, this is why these things are breaking down within, within Iran, because there does seem to be some type of leadership struggle and that just brings up the notion of our intelligence collection in Iran. And what I've talked about before with you guys is, hey, we're great at manhunting the fine fix and finish us and the Israelis can kill anyone anywhere on the planet. That's been demonstrated. That's a different type of intelligence collection, a different source you recruit for pattern of life versus a strategic asset in the, you know, in the, you know, Iranian, you know, Supreme Leader's office. So what do you guys think of it? Or if you have any window into the state of U.S. intel, collect now. I mean, do you think it's because it seems to me that Trump is now alluding to things that he would not have come up with on his own. So maybe there is some interesting intelligence collection that's coming in that details this kind of the splits within the Iranian leadership. What are your guys thoughts?

Mark Polymoropoulos (45:25)

I think it's probable. Obviously we've been tasked, we be in the intelligence community have been tasked to do this because it's absolutely pivotal for the negotiations. It's important for the US to know is this a tactic of delay where they believe they have leverage the longer this goes or is it actually a dysfunction of the government? Because that's a big determination. Because from the US perspective, from President Trump's perspective, if it's literally because the Supreme Leader doesn't want any technology communication devices around him for obvious reasons and there's this slow like courier system to get information back and forth, is it because there's just arguments between Vahidi and Golibov, for example, you see a lot of stuff about that and it's just, they just had an impasse that haven't been broken by the Supreme Leader. The Supreme Leader even alive. I don't know that I'm not starting a conspiracy theory, but when you don't present any evidence you're alive, you can't help people making a speculation you might not be. So I think it's, I think that would be task mark to your question. And I can see why the President would want to know. Like am I these guys really think that this is in their interest to do this delay tactic or is it just a complete disarray? And if it's the latter, then you might want to give them more latitude.

Jonathan Hackett (46:55)

And I think that that is actually really important because the time honored Iranian way of delay is something that Trump has said we're not going to allow to happen. But you know, perhaps because there is this dysfunction he has given this more time, that would make some sense. And actually in some ways that's, you know, I mean, I want President Trump to listen to his intelligence briefings. So that's kind of, kind of an interesting point there.

Mick Mulroy (47:20)

And I wonder how much division there is that could be exploited by covert action in Iran to keep splitting that more, keep it up because the longer that goes on the more opportunity we have to actually seize control of the situation instead of letting it just metastasize on its own.

Jonathan Hackett (47:35)

Well, that's a really good point. And one of the things I think everyone here on the pod in our group agree on is that. And we don't have the answer to this, but everything we're talking about has to do with kind of overt military moves or overt diplomatic moves. But where's the COVID action piece on this? We all worked in that kind of old secret world and there's been effort, covert action efforts against Iran going on forever. So I do wonder what's happening with that, because you could actually make an argument. And I think we've talked about this on so many. This goes back to the Soleimani strike. Why in the world was it not titled 50 versus title 10 while Trump wanted to brag about it. But there are things that we could be doing under the table, and I hope we are. I just don't know our capabilities anymore. And, you know, there was certainly some compromises, very public compromises in our Iranian networks over the last decade or so, but it would seem to me there is a huge place for covert action here. And because covert action works, and when it's in concert with US Policy, what

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (48:38)

kind of examples, what can they do, hypothetically in the press or whatever.

Mark Polymoropoulos (48:44)

Political influence. Oh, in the press. I mean, no, I'm talking about not

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (48:47)

say anything that's TTP wise. That's classified or whatever. Well, like, what could we.

Mark Polymoropoulos (48:51)

No, yeah. Actually wouldn't do that. I mean, we focus a lot on covert action being the kinetic stuff. Stuff that Mark's saying that we're really good at. We are good at it. We're good at finding people and making. Making them go away for sure. We're also really good at, I would say, partner force operations, you know, working with other. Although politically we screwed that up with not keeping our end of the deal. But we're really good at doing it, like embedding with groups. Look at the D ISIS program, for example. I think we could be just as good as it with influence operations.

Jonathan Hackett (49:24)

Yep.

Mark Polymoropoulos (49:25)

I don't know that we put the needed resources into it as we do with the others. If we are, great. If we aren't, we need to do a much better job. But they're only really effective if we keep them quiet. So, like, if we can't, as soon as we brag about doing something on the influence side, then everything that we touch turns to the opposite of gold. Put it that way. Right. Like I was going to ask Jonathan, like, who do we want to actually take power in Iran? But then I thought otherwise, because we put a damn target on their head. Right. So I think that's where we should. Not that Iran listens to eyes on, but maybe they do.

Jonathan Hackett (50:03)

But you need to be sponsor us.

Mark Polymoropoulos (50:06)

Yeah, but, but I think we could be just as good. We got really smart people. We're really good, especially in the agency, I would say, at integrating actual people from there, not just making somebody who's not from there an expert, as other agencies do. But I don't, I don't know. But we should be doing that nonstop. And we need to make sure that is the closest hold. Like there should be no bragging ever about the fact that we did it, if we did it.

Jonathan Hackett (50:36)

And I don't, by the way, on this note and Jonathan, maybe comment in a second. So Trump actually said, yeah, we love dealing with these moderates. There's now what he called moderates, pragmatists, reasonable people. Like, was that like the wrong thing to say? Because perhaps those are the people we want to be influencing to take power. But he just then did something. And then the reaction that we saw, of course, is that Vahidi and others then crushed all these moderates. So, you know, Mick, along with your point, Jonathan, we can put you on the spot. You know Iran better than us. I mean, who is, who would be the. Who would be someone that. Or a group, you can say the pragmatists, moderates, whatever you reformers that we should be pushing, that would be a. The better, let's just say the best negotiating partner to get to a reasonable settlement.

Mick Mulroy (51:24)

The mistake would be describing them as moderates, because the way the Constitution is set up is to filter all candidates through the Supreme Leader's office. So anyone in any position of authority that currently is in the government now has already been approved by the Supreme Leader, which means they already have bought into the list of requirements that they must have. Not just religious requirements, but also ideological alignment and other things that put them in a certain bucket that would be unacceptable to the U.S. unless the U.S. is willing to change its policy like we did with Ahmed Al Shara in Syria, where the first week of December he was a $10 million bounty in his head. And the second week of December we are meeting with him in his office and he's now our friend.

Jonathan Hackett (52:00)

So playing basketball with him.

Mick Mulroy (52:02)

Yeah. I mean, if that's the way we're going to go, okay, that's how we go. But if we're going to look at it rationally and say, like, he's still the same guy, they're still the same people, and they still have the same dreams and outcomes that they want from before we took the bounties off and before we changed the designation. So, Mick, to your point, actually, the answer to that question is actually more interesting. The people that are the ones who can come to power are the people. So there needs to be some kind of referendum or change in the structure of the government where the people that are not allowed to have power are allowed to have power, because all the ones who do have power are aligned with the regime. If you describe them as moderate, that's all relative. It's moderate in relation to a hardliner. And what does that even mean? I mean, that's just an abstract thing. So I would be worried about keeping the people in government who are there now and expecting them to become aligned with us, because that's not how they were picked in the first place. It was an evolution of their beliefs that got them to the point where they are now, and they're not going to change that inside themselves. They might publicly say, oh, we're fixed, we're better now. But I don't know if I would trust that.

Jonathan Hackett (53:02)

So who are the better negotiating partners or it just doesn't matter is what you're saying. That's curious.

Mick Mulroy (53:08)

From a realist perspective, probably Golubov is best because he is a survivor. He knows how to move around in the system and arrange power structures in a way that's beneficial. And if he's doing that in the government, that's probably helpful to keep things predictable, because sometimes it's better, even if the guy is bad, if you know about him, it's easier than if you don't know about him. But he's good because you don't know what to expect. So in this case, we can actually prepare things around knowing how he behaves and what he does, because we've been following him for a long time and he's pretty predictable as far as what he's going to do next, whereas someone like Vahidi is a lot less like that. And that's because Vahidi has an ideological thing guiding him, and that is the destruction of Israel. And he's said this since 1979, that that's his dream. And he keeps saying it, even now, like today he said it. So I mean, this is not something that's changing very soon for him. So putting someone like that or allowing them to reach the top is probably not going to be a helpful outcome for the U.S. so someone like Pazashkian is not good the president, because he's very weak. And he was selected to be president on purpose because of his weakness. And Raisi was like the opposite of Peseschki. And Raisi died in a helicopter crash. They brought Peseschki in because he could actually be that counterbalance of moderate to the more hardline group, which is led by fahiti. So these people all exist within the same universe, basically of their belief system. So from us on the outside, there aren't really any moderates really in there. In terms of the world's idea of what a moderate is.

Mark Polymoropoulos (54:32)

Is it true that the commander of the IRGC can remove the speaker of the parliament during wartime? That's another thing that's been bouncing around with reporters out there.

Mick Mulroy (54:44)

So he would need the Expediency Council to approve that, because none of these decisions can be made without the supreme leader in theory. And the Expediency Council is supposed to act on his behalf in this situation. But we also saw that Mojtaba was selected without the correct process in the constitution. So Vahidi is the one that actually pushed that movement outside of process. So I would not be surprised if he acts outside of process again, because who's going to stop him? He's the one that controls the most violent organization in the country with the most power and authority behind him. So in this situation, I mean, he's like an authoritarian inside of an authoritarian system. So he's got this ability to just unilaterally act. I wouldn't be surprised if he just broke the quote, unquote rules that they have.

Mark Polymoropoulos (55:26)

So this is a worthy discussion, because here's the problem, right? We could have Golubov, that could come around to our perspective, but it really doesn't matter if FAHITI can simply fire him. And so all of the negotiations that we, if we do get these going, which we all hope we do, it really comes down if that's the case and he has the authority to do it and obviously has the inclination, then it really comes down to trying to get Kinst Fahiti, which is the most hardline person I've heard described, that it's a good idea to enter a new nuclear agreement with the United States, right? Because if he gets close to an agreement or even if he has an agreement, he can simply remove from having any authority.

Mick Mulroy (56:16)

And think about that in the short term, if he was able to do that, let's say that he just allowed Golubov to reach an agreement with the US and then pulled the agreement and pulled Golubov. Think about the embarrassment to the United States that would have, especially if he allowed it to string on so that people get their hopes up in the west and they think everything's great. And he just yanks that out. Huge. Huge media benefit and information spectrum benefit by doing that. And then he could continue on with whatever plan he has. So he's almost got a double win out of this by allowing Golubov to look like he's in control until the moment that it has the highest value to remove him.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (56:52)

So Vahidi's number one target if the bombing starts again, I'm assuming. Right. That's who we're looking for.

Mick Mulroy (56:59)

I would assume the US Asked Israel not to kill Vahiti during the initial strikes.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (57:03)

I feel like that's going to change a little bit now if the dust is settled now and he's like the big boy who's making the moves. And he, you know, is obviously hard. Hard liners. Hard as it gets. This is gonna be great, guys. This is gonna be great. Yeah, I really feel really confident about how this is gonna end, Frank. Really? Anything else?

Jonathan Hackett (57:28)

What else? Red Sox car. Their entire front off their entire coaching staff.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (57:32)

No one cares.

Jonathan Hackett (57:33)

Mark Iran, White House correspondence, dinner, whatever. Let's talk about the Red Sox. The state of the Red Sox is not good. I went to the game yesterday in Baltimore. They won 17 to 1 and then they fired everybody. There you go.

Mark Polymoropoulos (57:47)

Why they fire?

Jonathan Hackett (57:48)

Because they suck. They're 10 and 17. So the red Sox are not doing very well.

Danielle Robaix (57:53)

This is Danielle Robaix from Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club. Nothing compares to the anticipation of something new. A new start, a new year, a new home, or a new car. When it's time to get a new car, where do you start? Car shopping can honestly be a little overwhelming. But it should be fun. Buying your next car should be exciting. And it can be if you remember one thing. Cars.com cars.com has the tools and expert advice to help you figure out what vehicle is right for you. Their advanced search filters allow you to explore 2 million new and used cars so that you can find the perfect car. The site is so easy to use. Looking for an electric vehicle with a third row and leather seats for easy cleanup, Cars.com has you covered. A variety of tools and badges are used to help shoppers understand the price of a vehicle and find the best deal. And every review is written by a real person reflecting a real life experience. So don't take any chances. Do car shopping the easy way. Start your search with cars.com where to next?

Blue Square Alliance Advertiser (58:56)

Here's a thought that shouldn't be controversial. You can think someone is completely wrong and still not hate them. I know. Wild. But somehow we've turned disagreement into a personality and hate into something people are way too comfortable with. And it's not just happening in one place. Hate is rising across communities in different ways. And Jewish communities are getting hit especially hard right now. And hate doesn't just stay in one lane. It spreads. So even if you think this isn't your issue, give it a minute. You don't have to agree with people. You just have to decide you're not okay with hate. That's it. The blue square is a simple way to say that out loud. Go to bluesquarealliance.org, get a pin, share it or don't, but at least don't pretend this isn't happening.

Mark Polymoropoulos (59:35)

Happening.

Spin Quest Advertiser (59:36)

You know what? It sucks to be bored. But when I get on my phone and play real casino games on spinquest.com, the time flies by. That two hour wait at the DMV seems like 10 minutes. Play your favorite slots, live blackjack, live craps with a live dealer. New players. 30 coin packs are on sale for 10 bucks. Play spinquest.com and you'll never be bored again.

Spin Quest Advertiser (59:59)

Spin Quest is a free to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

Jonathan Hackett (60:05)

But D enjoys this as a. As a New Yorkers.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (60:11)

Yeah, no, I'm happy. It's all right. They'll be fine.

Jonathan Hackett (60:13)

Aaron, you have Aaron Boone. There you go.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (60:16)

All right, guys, listen, do us a favor. I want you guys to go and buy Jonathan Hackett's books. Iran Shadow Weapons and the Theory of Irregular Warfare. Those links are in the description mix. Got it on his shelf. Yeah, I want you guys to go and check out the Whitefish Security Summit website. The next one is happening early 2027 in February. End of February.

Mark Polymoropoulos (60:39)

2-24-26. Yep, we got some. We got some good folks speaking, if you wouldn't mind me.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (60:46)

Of course.

Mark Polymoropoulos (60:48)

Sam Bundy, Turd Marsa Commander three star General Carrie Filippetti, former DAS Deputy Assistant Secretary for Venezuela. And she runs a Vandenberg coalition now. Who else? Admiral Burns, used to run the naval component of Chesk. Michael Ratney, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia. Chris Costa. He's the current director of the spy museum, but was presidential Special Advisor for counterterrorism and hopefully all of Our team from ison, so it's shaping up to be pretty freaking good. So. Excited about it.

Jonathan Hackett (61:37)

Bring your bear spray.

Mark Polymoropoulos (61:40)

Yes. Or buy it here and don't take it on the plane. That's a big issue. People coming on the. In Montana, they always, like, there's, like, signs when you're getting. Get to the airport, like, do not bring your bear spray on the plane. Apparently, it blows up.

Jonathan Hackett (61:53)

You're totally getting eaten by a bear.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (61:55)

Yeah. 100. I'm.

Jonathan Hackett (61:57)

They're lining up right now.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (61:58)

Look, I'm not leaving the hotel, bro. I'm a concrete princess, dude. My pavement princess. That's what they call it.

Jonathan Hackett (62:09)

You're gonna see, decked out in some snow gear. It's gonna be good.

Mark Polymoropoulos (62:11)

Yeah, we'll go skiing. The ski resort is. You guys can see it. Can you see the. It's still not. You still got snow on the actual runs.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (62:23)

Yeah. I'll sit back in the cab and you guys let me know. Give me the brief when you guys come get back. No, I could ski, actually. I used to be. I used to ski. Not anymore. I don't want to break a hip. You know what I'm saying? I can't have that. All right, so check that out. The link is in the description for the summit. Mark P. He's got a book. Clarity in Crisis. Mike. Mark, you should write a memoir. Just do it, man.

Jonathan Hackett (62:50)

I'm barnstorming the country, doing my Red Sox stuff, you know. Yeah, my little TV gig. You know, I did actually two college talks this week. I was at Georgetown and then. And then at University of Virginia. And just on a quick note on that, just for votes. I mean, obviously, you know, we deal with a lot of negativity about what's happening. Huge partisan divides in the United States. But when you go talk to students and Jonathan, I'm sure you see this at Yale, too. I mean, there is, you know, that's passing the torch to the next generation. There's some really smart folks out there. So that's what kind of gives me a boost, you know, just, you know, that there are. There are people still willing to step up and do public service. Every time I do these talks, I ask people, how many of here in an audience of 50 are interested in going to the government. A lot of people raise their hand. That's a good thing.

Mark Polymoropoulos (63:39)

Good. That's good to hear.

Host (possibly Sean or main moderator) (63:41)

All right, boys, as always, a pleasure, do us a favor. Support the show. Patreon.com TheTeamHouse you get everything ad free and early. And, yeah, it helps support the show. Thanks guys.

Mark Polymoropoulos (63:56)

Thank you.

Spin Quest Advertiser (64:00)

Hey guys, I want to take a moment to tell you about the Team House Podcast newsletter. If you go and subscribe, it's totally free and what it will do is aggregate all of our data, all of our content that we put out, the things that are on the Team House on our Geopolitics podcast. Eyes on things that I write journalistically with Sean Naylor. On the high side, anything else that we have going on, books we recommend, upcoming guests that we have coming on the show and also, you know, filtering in some fun stuff in there as well. If you'll go and check it out. We send it out just once a week. We don't want to spam you guys. It's just a kind of roll up of all of our content on a weekly basis. You can find our newsletter@teamhousepodcast.kit.com again the website for that is teamhousepodcast kit.com join so we hope to see you there. The link will be down in the description.

Danielle Robaix (65:00)

This is Danielle Roubaix from bookmarked by Reese's Book Club. Nothing compares to the anticipation of something new. A new start, a new year, a new home, or a new car. When it's time to get a new car, where do you start? Car shopping can honestly be a little overwhelming, but it should be fun. Buying your next car should be exciting. And it can be if you remember one thing. Cars.com cars.com has the tools and expert advice to help you figure out what vehicle is right for you. Their advanced search filters allow you to explore 2 million new and used cars so that you can find the perfect car. The site is so easy to use. Looking for an electric vehicle with a third row and leather seats for easy cleanup, Cars.com has you covered. A variety of tools and badges are used to help shoppers understand the price of a vehicle and find the best deal. And every review is written by a real person reflecting a real life experience. So don't take any chances. Do car shopping the easy way. Start your search with cars.com where to next?

Blue Square Alliance Advertiser (66:04)

Here's a thought that shouldn't be controversial. You can think someone is completely wrong and still not hate them. I know. Wild. But somehow we've turned disagreement into a personality and hate into something people are way too comfortable with. And it's not just happening in one place. Hate is rising across communities in different ways, and Jewish communities are getting hit especially hard right now. And hate doesn't just stay in one lane, it spreads. So even if you think this isn't your issue. Give it a minute. You don't have to agree with people, you just have to decide you're not okay with hate. That's it. The blue square is a simple way to say that out loud. Go to bluesquarealliance.org, get a pin, share it or don't, but at least don't pretend this this isn't happening.

Spin Quest Advertiser (66:43)

Whether it's slots or live dealers, Spinquest.com has the fun and action you're looking for with Spin Quest exclusives. Blackjack, roulette, baccarat, and even live dice. With craps and bubble craps. The games never stop so you don't have to. And right now, new users get $30 coin packs for just 10 bucks. Play now@spinquest.com Spin Quest is of course

Spin Quest Advertiser (67:08)

free to play Social Casino Void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

Danielle Robaix (67:20)

This is Danielle Robay from Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club. Nothing compares to the anticipation of something new. A new start, a new year, a new home, or a new car. When it's time to get a new car, where do you start? Car shopping can honestly be a little overwhelming, but it should be fun. Buying your next car should be exciting. And it can be, if you remember one cars.com cars.com has the tools and expert advice to help you figure out what vehicle is right for you. Their advanced search filters allow you to explore 2 million new and used cars so that you can find the perfect car. The site is so easy to use, looking for an electric vehicle with a third row and leather seats for easy cleanup. Cars.com has you covered. A variety of tools and badges are used to help shoppers understand the price of a vehicle and find the best deal. And every review is written by a real person, reflecting a real life experience. So don't take any chances. Do car shopping the easy way. Start your search with cars.com where to next?

Blue Square Alliance Advertiser (68:23)

Here's a thought that shouldn't be controversial. You can think someone is completely wrong and still not hate them. I know, wild. But somehow we've turned disagreement into a personality and hate into something people are way too comfortable with. And it's not just happening in one place. Hate is rising across communities in different ways, and Jewish communities are getting hit especially hard right now. And hate doesn't just stay in one lane. It spreads. So even if you think this isn't your issue, give it a minute. You don't have to agree with people, you just have to decide you're not okay with hate. That's it. The blue square is a simple way to say that out loud. Go to bluesquarealliance.org, get a pin, share it or don't, but at least don't pretend this this isn't happening.

Spin Quest Advertiser (69:04)

Forget everything you had planned for this weekend because you are sitting on your couch and winning from the comfort of your own home. I'm here with Spin Quest, where you can play hundreds of slot games, all the table games you love, and you could even win real cash prizes. New users $30 coin packs are on sale for 10@spinquest.com Spin Quest is a

Spin Quest Advertiser (69:26)

free to play social media casino void where prohibited. Visit spendquest.com for more details.

Danielle Robaix (69:38)

This is Danielle Robay from Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club. Nothing compares to the anticipation of something new, a new start, a new year, a new home, or a new car. When it's time to get a new car, where do you start? Car shopping can honestly be a little overwhelming, but it should be fun. Buying your next car should be exciting. And it can be if you remember one thing. Cars.com cars.com has the tools and expert advice to help you figure out what vehicle is right for you. Their advanced search filters allow you to explore 2 million new and used cars so that you can find the perfect car. The site is so easy to use, looking for an electric vehicle with a third row and leather seats for easy cleanup, Cars.com has you covered. A variety of tools and badges are used to help shoppers understand the price of a vehicle and find the best deal. And every review is written by a real person reflecting a real life experience, so don't take any chances. Do car shopping the easy way. Start your search with cars.com where to next?

Blue Square Alliance Advertiser (70:42)

Here's a thought that shouldn't be controversial. You can think someone is completely wrong and still not hate them. I know. Wild. But somehow we've turned disagreement into a personality and hate into something people are way too comfortable with. And it's not just happening in one place. Hate is rising across communities in different ways, and Jewish communities are getting hit especially hard right now. And hate doesn't just stay in one lane. It spreads. So even if you think this isn't your issue, give it a minute. You don't have to agree with people, you just have to decide you're not okay with hate. That's it. The blue square is a simple way to say that out loud. Go to bluesquarealliance.org, get a pin, share it or don't but at least don't pretend this this isn't happening.

Mark Polymoropoulos (71:21)

What's up baby?

Jonathan Hackett (71:22)

It's Bretzky and I'm here to tell you that spinquest.com is giving out free Sweeps coins. All you got to do is purchase a ten dollar coin pack and guess what?

Mick Mulroy (71:32)

They're gonna give you the coins from

Jonathan Hackett (71:34)

a thirty dollar coin pack that lets

Mick Mulroy (71:36)

you play all your favorite games like

Jonathan Hackett (71:38)

Blackjack, Wanted, Dead or Wild. And we're talking real cash prizes baby.

Spin Quest Advertiser (71:42)

Spin Quest.com Spin Quest is a free to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spendquest.com for more details.

Danielle Robaix (71:56)

This is Danielle Robe from Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club. Nothing compares to the anticipation of something new. A new start, a new year, a new home, or a new car. When it's time to get a new car, where do you start? Car shopping can honestly be a little overwhelming, but it should be fun. Buying your next car should be exciting. And it can be if you remember one thing. Cars.com cars.com has the tools and expert advice to help you figure out what vehicle is right for you. Their advanced search filters allow you to explore 2 million new and used cars so that you can find the perfect car. The site is so easy to use, looking for an electric vehicle with a third row and leather seats for easy cleanup, Cars.com has you covered. A variety of tools and badges are used to help shoppers understand the price of a vehicle and find the best deal. And every review is written by a real person reflecting a real life experience, so don't take any chances. Do car shopping the easy way. Start your search with cars.com where to next?

Blue Square Alliance Advertiser (72:59)

Here's a thought that shouldn't be controversial. You can think someone is completely wrong and still not hate them. I know. Wild. But somehow we've turned disagreement into a personality and hate into something people are way too comfortable with. And it's not just happening in one place. Hate is rising across communities in different ways, and Jewish communities are getting hit especially hard right now. And hate doesn't just stay in one lane. It spreads. So even if you think this isn't your issue, give it a minute. You don't have to agree with people, you just have to decide you're not okay with hate. That's it. The blue square is a simple way to say that out loud. Go to bluesquarealliance.org, get a pin, share it, or don't, but at least don't pretend this isn't happening.

Spin Quest Advertiser (73:40)

Forget everything you had planned for this weekend because you are sitting on your couch and winning from the comfort of your own home. I'm here with spinquest where you can play hundreds of slot games, all the table games you love, and you could even win real cash prizes. New users 30 coin packs are on sale for 10@Spinquest.com Spin Quest is a

Spin Quest Advertiser (74:02)

free to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

Danielle Robaix (74:17)

This is Danielle Robay from Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club. Nothing compares to the anticipation of something new, a new start, a new year, a new home, or a new car. When it's time to get a new car, where do you start? Car shopping can honestly be a little overwhelming, but it should be fun. Buying your next car should be exciting. And it can be if you remember one thing. Cars.com cars.com has the tools and expert advice to help you figure out what vehicle is right for you. Their advanced search filters allow you to explore 2 million new and used cars so that you can find the perfect car. The site is so easy to use, looking for an electric vehicle with a third row and leather seats for easy cleanup. Cars.com has you covered. A variety of tools and badges are used to help shoppers understand the price of a vehicle and find the best deal. And every review is written by a real person reflecting a real life experience, so don't take any chances. Do car shopping the easy way. Start your search with cars.com where to next?

Blue Square Alliance Advertiser (75:20)

Here's a thought that shouldn't be controversial. You can think someone is completely wrong and still not hate them. I know. Wild. But somehow we've turned disagreement into a personality and hate into something people are way too comfortable with. And it's not just happening in one place. Hate is rising across communities in different ways, and Jewish communities are getting hit especially hard right now. And hate doesn't just stay in one lane, it spreads. So even if you think this isn't your issue, give it a minute. You don't have to agree with people, you just have to decide you're not okay with hate. That's it. The blue square is a simple way to say that out loud. Go to bluesquarealliance.org, get a pin, share it, or don't, but at least don't pretend this this isn't happening.

Spin Quest Advertiser (76:01)

Forget everything you had planned for this weekend because you are sitting on your couch and winning from the comfort of your own home. I'm here with Spin Quest, where you can play hundreds of slot games, all the table games you love, and you could even win real cash prizes. New users $30 coin packs are on sale for 10@spinquest.com Spin Quest is a

Spin Quest Advertiser (76:23)

free to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

Danielle Robaix (76:38)

This is Danielle Roubaix from Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club. Nothing compares to the anticipation of something new, a new start, a new year, a new home, or a new car. When it's time to get a new car, where do you start? Car shopping can honestly be a little overwhelming, but it should be fun. Buying your next car should be exciting. And it can be if you remember one thing. Cars.com cars.com has the tools and expert advice to help you figure out what vehicle is right for you. Their advanced search filters allow you to explore 2 million new and used cars so that you can find the perfect car. The site is so easy to use. Looking for an electric vehicle with a third row and leather seats for easy cleanup. Cars.com has you covered. A variety of tools and badges are used to help shoppers understand the price of a vehicle and find the best deal. And every review is written by a real person reflecting a real life experience, so don't take any chances. Do car shopping the easy way. Start your search with cars.com where to next?

Blue Square Alliance Advertiser (77:42)

Here's a thought that shouldn't be controversial. You can think someone is completely wrong and still not hate them. I know, wild. But somehow we've turned disagreement into a personality and hate into something people are way too comfortable with. And it's not just happening in one place. Hate is rising across communities in different ways, and Jewish communities are getting hit especially hard right now. And hate doesn't just stay in one lane, it spreads. So even if you think this isn't your issue, give it a minute. You don't have to agree with people, you just have to decide you're not okay with hate. That's it. The blue square is a simple way to say that out loud. Go to bluesquarealliance.org, get a pin, share it. Or don't, but at least don't pretend that this isn't happening.

Spin Quest Advertiser (78:22)

Forget everything you had planned for this weekend because you are sitting on your couch and winning from the comfort of your own home. I'm here with spinquest, where you can play hundreds of slot games, all the table games you love, and you could even win real cash prizes. New users 30 coin packs are on sale for 10@Spinquest.com Spin Quest is a

Spin Quest Advertiser (78:45)

free to play social media casino void where prohibited, visit spendquest.com for more details.

Danielle Robaix (78:58)

This is Danielle Robay from Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club. Nothing compares to the anticipation of something new, a new start, a new year, a new home, or a new car. When it's time to get a new car, where do you start? Car shopping can honestly be a little overwhelming, but it should be fun. Buying your next car should be exciting. And it can be if you remember one thing. Cars.com cars.com has the tools and expert advice to help you figure out what vehicle is right for you. Their advanced search filters allow you to explore 2 million new and used cars so that you can find the perfect car. The site is so easy to use. Looking for an electric vehicle with a third row and leather seats for easy cleanup, Cars.com has you covered. A variety of tools and badges are used to help shoppers understand the price of a vehicle and find the best deal. And every review is written by a real person reflecting a real life experience, so don't take any chances. Do car shopping the easy way. Start your search with cars.com where to next?

Blue Square Alliance Advertiser (80:01)

Here's a thought that shouldn't be controversial. You can think someone is completely wrong and still not hate them. I know, Wild. But somehow we've turned disagreement into a personality and hate into something people are way too comfortable with. And it's not just happening in one place. Hate is rising across communities in different ways, and Jewish communities are getting hit especially hard right now. And hate doesn't just stay in one lane, it spreads. So even if you think this isn't your issue, give it a minute. You don't have to agree with people, you just have to decide you're not okay with hate. That's it. The blue square is a simple way to say that out loud. Go to bluesquarealliance.org, get a pin, share it or don't, but at least don't pretend that this isn't happening.

Mark Polymoropoulos (80:41)

What's up baby?

Jonathan Hackett (80:42)

It's Bretzky and I'm here to tell you that spinquest.com is giving out free Sweeps coins. All you gotta do is purchase a ten dollar coin pack and guess what?

Mick Mulroy (80:52)

They're gonna give you the coins from

Jonathan Hackett (80:53)

a thirty dollar coin pack that lets

Mick Mulroy (80:56)

you play all your favorite games like

Jonathan Hackett (80:57)

Blackjack, Wanted Dead or Wild. And we're talking real cash prizes baby.

Spin Quest Advertiser (81:02)

Spin Quest.com Spin Quest is a free to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

Spin Quest Advertiser (81:11)

Forget whatever plans you have this weekend because you're staying at home and playing on Spin Quest and there's never been a better time to sign up than right now. New users get $30 coin packs for just $10 all the table games you love with hundreds of slot games and real cash Prizes. That's at spinquest.com S P I N Q wuest.com SpinQuest is a free to

Spin Quest Advertiser (81:34)

play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spendquest.com for more details.

Jonathan Hackett (81:40)

You didn't start a business just to keep the lights on. You're here to sell more today than yesterday. You're here to win. Lucky for you, Shopify built the best converting checkout on the planet. Like the just one tapping ridiculously fast

Spin Quest Advertiser (81:56)

acting sky high sales stacking champion at checkouts. That's the good stuff right there.

Jonathan Hackett (82:01)

So if your business is in it to win it, win with Shopify.

Spin Quest Advertiser (82:05)

Start your free trial today@shopify.com win.

Mark Polymoropoulos (82:10)

I like things my way. My coffee, my schedule and my treatment. So I talked to my doctor about self injecting with the Vivgard Hyrulo pre filled syringe which contains fgar, Tigamund Alpha and Hyaluronidase qvfc. It's injected under your skin subcutaneously. It means I can inject in my space on my time. It's my treatment my way. Visit vivgartmyway. Com that's V Y V G A R T Myway. Com and talk to your doctor about Vivgart Hydrulo brought to you by Argenics.