TRUMP ON IRAN: "ONE SHOT AND WE TAKE THEM ALL OUT" — w/ Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski

Except, a little depressing listening to what Chris was talking. My god. And he's, he's incredible. Yeah. It's, it's, it's something I'm discussing more and more because it's, it's just, it's just true. It's like if he told me at the beginning of the conversation that section 224 seems like it's going to pass. So I'm like, if section 224 is going to pass, one of the most obvious, stupid, bad things for the United States, for the average person, like if you go to an average American on the street and say, "Hey, there's a section that says XY Z, and that's going to pass and become law." They'd be like, "No freaking way. You're making [ __ ] up." No, it's actually about to pass.

Um, if that passes, how the hell we're going to prevent censorship or or or or having that, I wouldn't say autocracy, but kind of a that level of control by the government that we've been that we believe is is will never happen in a country like the United States that is based on the foundation of liberty and freedom. Um, yeah, it's concerning. And now, and and all started with the visit that cuz BB's visiting Trump early next week. So that's never a good thing.

Um, and then you've got also Trump just a few days ago saying about the funeral. So that was a massive funeral. You saw the funeral for. Yeah. >> Yeah. I can't even. >> 9 million people. >> Yeah. That's what I saw. That that's that's one-tenth of the population. Just under one-tenth. So imagine that in Washington. That would be like, um, 35 million people coming to DC. Or, >> imagine, do you ever, would you ever have, we ever seen that in the United States, that level of mobilization for anything? >> No. I, I remember maybe it was under Obama, we had a million man march, and they used to have there for a couple, three years, we had million man marches, and I forget what they were about, probably civil rights or something, but could have been anything. Anyway, they didn't quite make a million. They were almost a million, you know, and and that was kind of the target goal. And, um, I think they, they don't have those, but that's that's less than a million. That was probably the biggest thing in my lifetime. Uh, so this is this is just, uh, incomprehensible, really. And then you see the, yeah, from a distance, and you see where people. It's crazy. We're talking about how, um, like maybe the the government was not popular before, but like this is the the cost of this war. Like all these people, how do you think they look at the US? A lot of people in Iran used to love the US, and so many of them, Israel, too. How do you think they see the US and Israel now?

>> Oh, yeah. I mean, how can they, um, you know, that's what assassinations of of political or, uh, civil rights leaders, you know, Martin Luther King, his assassination brought out crowds. I mean, that people felt that even people that didn't even support Martin Luther King, they still felt like they had been personally attacked. Um, and that wasn't from another country. Can you imagine if another country had come in and killed an American figure, whether 60 years ago or or right now? It's just, uh, I, I think we don't understand the ramifications of of our policies, and we don't even try to, because it's very easy to understand them. You just, you know, look at some case studies, and this is this is totally, uh, I think predictable.

You know, and also, um, I was watching some of the guys, um, English speakers who are there, uh, broadcasting stuff, and one of them was had some pictures of parts of Iran that had been, uh, really destroyed, hit hard, and not, you know, haven't had a chance to really build them back. And, you know, you think about the the number of, uh, average Iranians that have also died. Of course, the children, you can't get away from, uh, the Manob 168, but it's not just that. I mean, they've been, they've had other, uh, families and and, uh, children, men, women, and children targeted. So, they've lost a lot. And they lost their leader. And this is almost, I mean, it's not, it's understandable in some ways. In another way, for Americans though, it's not understandable because we, this is their religious leader. We don't have an American religious leader. I think Trump with MAGA had maybe he thought he was going to do that, but we don't have a single religious leader in in the United States that, um, that everyone respects and honors and feels connected to and, uh, has confidence in. We don't have anything like that in our country. And so when we took out, when we, this assassination was was executed, um, you know, we took out not just the political top dog in a sense, but the religious inspirational leader, the the one who puts together what it means in today in this day and age, what it means to be an Iranian, you know, and and and also he's the symbol of all those years of suffering and sanctions and everybody saying bad things about Iran. And he's led his country through really a desert, you could say. Um, so like a Moses figure, almost. And Americans, we don't think in those terms. We don't, you know, we have freedom of religion, that means freedom not to have a religion. That's what a lot of Americans, uh, think about. And they, they don't, uh, we don't even imagine that, uh, countries like Iran even exist where they are not just bound in a political state structure, but they're also bound in a religious construct. And, you know, it's interesting because the Christians, the the Jewish communities, the other religious communities that exist in Iran all have representatives here. They're all paying, you know, their respects and homage to, uh, to the Ayatollah. So, yeah, I, I don't think, I mean, it's like it's like our government. I mean, why do we have highly educated and highly paid people in government to don't they know that this, don't they, they, I don't think they even have any concept.

Trump seems very surprised. Oh, I thought everybody hated them. How can, how can he possibly be that stupid, that ill-informed, even on his own, but much less with the whole system of US intelligence and US, uh, policymakers able to communicate to him? And how could we all be that stupid? It just, it just makes, um, it's, it's very, very, it's, it's incomprehensible, really.

>> Yeah. It's concerning for when I saw him put say that, um, there was like two theories for me. I'm like, either he, he's just saying the truth. He genuinely is surprised, or, um, he's just saying it because politically, you know, he's just, he's just saying things just political. Um, just trying to make a point. Um, but if it's the first, if he was genuinely surprised by this, um, >> it concerns me because you worry that the person that has so much influence around the world is >> is actually living in an information bubble. And I don't think people understand how dangerous it is to be >> misinformed, the the dangers of ignorance. Um, when you have someone making decisions, you know, thinking, hey, if I kill their leader, they're all going to collapse like Venezuela. I'm going to control their oil. Decisions like this lead to sorry, false assumptions like this lead to decisions >> that have severe consequences. The consequences of this war that was meant to be a quick four-day war, whatever it is, one week, two-week war, are going to be felt for years and decades. As I said, those millions of people are going to have the wrong perception, not wrong, a very negative perception of of the US. They're actually chanting on the streets, death to Israel and death to the US, and some of them saying, we're going to avenge our dear leader and kill, go after President Trump, etc. Yeah, >> you've just created that hate in millions of people. And I was telling Chris earlier that, um, you know, 9/11, Osama bin Laden, when he gave the reasons, you, when someone does something evil, you'd want to ask him like, "Hey, why did you just freaking do this?" Um, and he told the world, he's like, "Hey, I did this because the US is causing a lot of death and destruction in our region, has bases in our holy land in Saudi. That's our land. It's Muslim land. And, you know, it's killing a lot of Muslims through all these different wars and backing all these different proxies." And number two is the support for Israel, which is doing what it's doing to to Palestinians in the region. And that only got worse since, by the way, just to be clear, that was back then. And, you know, 20 years later, look where Palestinians are at. Um, so instead of learning from this and and just trying to change our foreign policy or America's foreign policy, >> um, we just feel like I feel like we're just doubling down on that path. And it's a, to what end? When will things change? That's that's a big question. Like, when will we really disengage out of the region? We thought we'll disengage. The US will disengage after this war with Iran. Well, there's a new deal that the US signed up to in Lebanon. Get the hell out of Lebanon. Let the Lebanese figure it out. You've caused enough mess. There's meetings with Alshara trying to figure out a plan there and telling Alshara to go into Lebanon. Um, there's talks about how to deal with the Houthis, visits to the Gulf regions, continuing work on the Iran deal and trying to enforce America's control over the Strait of Hormuz, unsuccessfully so far. Um, and now BB's going to Trump. Trump should even just say no to Netanyahu's visit. Like, he visited me last time. He got me into this freaking war. Let's just have a phone call. That's a, let's avoid meeting one-on-one.

>> Well, well, Ben Gvir didn't go. Ben Gvir didn't go to New York. You know, he canceled his New York trip. >> Yeah, I saw. Arrest him. So, so I think, uh, there's some things that we don't measure, um, if we only look at what the government policymakers are doing because clearly, yeah, we are expanding military footprint in Lebanon, in Gaza, in Israel, in Jordan, uh, beefing up the base we have in Jordan there. Um, where else, uh, uh, you know, so, so, but we are in a, I don't think Rubio's trip was successful in, uh, telling the Gulf States what they need to do. I think they pretty much nodded and thanked him and then continued to do what they were going to do, which is to balance their foreign policy much more closely with their neighbors and with the regional. So I think that is happening. I think our retreat is right now eastward, not all the way back to Washington, but, uh, but eastward, at least into the, to the, you know, where Israel, where Israel can fly an airplane, drop a bomb and not have to be refueled on the way back. That's, we're moving to to that. So we are seeing a little bit of a shift in our foreign policy. The language and the leadership has not woken up to what, uh, everybody else in the world is waking up to.

You know, Trump, well, first off, Trump has, uh, I, I think, you know, we talked about this before. You know, his his whole Car Island thing was invented in late 1980s, and he never let it go. He never let it go. It was like, you know, I got a good idea. I'm gonna hold on to it so for the next 50 years or whatever. And he did. Okay. He says, once he gets an idea that he thinks is good, then he checks that box.

>> You think, do you think Netanyahu, do you think Netanyahu can play on that card to try to convince him again on Iran? Does that worry you?

>> Well, no. I, I actually, I think Trump, you know, he likes to, well, Trump never blames himself, right? Trump never makes a mistake. It's always somebody around him who's done something wrong. They've told him wrong, or they let him wrong, or they were in it for their own business. They didn't flatter him enough. That's why he didn't listen. Whatever it was, it's never him. It's always somebody else's fault. So, he is, um, not happy with Netanyahu. And and I've said this before, but Netanyahu is not a winner here. You know, he's very unpopular at home. Trump is very. Now, this is something Trump is aware of. You know, he doesn't understand his potential enemies or people that he wants to attack or regime change. He has no interest in how those countries actually work or what they think. He doesn't care about that. But he does have an interest in Israel, partly because Israel, Israelis, Zionists have given him a lot of money. He's benefited from them throughout his whole life. So he has a connection there. Many of his friends, his son-in-law, are avid Zionists. He trusts them. Um, so he pays attention to Israeli politics. And Netanyahu is very unpopular. You know, Trump tells the nation, "I'm the most popular guy." He's still out on a, you know, all his speeches like, "Look how great everything is." And you watch him, if you're an American and you watch him, you go, "Well, that's not true. That's not true. What do you mean a jobs, economy, stock market? That's how you make." He said he made all his money because the stock market went up. I mean, my god. So, a lot of people don't believe what he says, but he's big on how popular he is, but he does know, he does pay close attention to how popular Netanyahu is not, which he isn't. I mean, his government, they're going to have elections. There is, uh, he and, you know, I'm not saying Netanyahu's coalition couldn't squeak through, but basically he's not popular. Trump knows this, and Trump does not associate with losers. This is Trump's, this is just his operational policy. If you're a loser, I'm going to humiliate you, you know, publicly torture you, or whatever. I'm going to have fun with you like a cat with a mouse, but I'm not going to, uh, I'm not going to really hang with you. I'm not going to defend you. I'm not going to help, you know, try to make you more popular than you are. This is why we see this all the time when he endorses in primaries or when he makes a an endorsement in a domestic race. He always waits until the numbers pretty well show that his candidate is going to win, and then he does it. So, in some ways, he's not a risk taker. And I think, um, he may call Netanyahu, he may end up canceling Netanyahu's visit or have a visit with Netanyahu that's not the typical, you know, I pull out my chair in the Oval Office and, you know, it's all, it's all differential. Um, so because Trump is a blamer, and I think Netanyahu is getting some of the blame for this, but Trump, I mean, we, I'm just saying this based on what he's been saying, you know, "Well, look how much we've done for Israel." Uh, Vance is echoing some of this. You know, "We've done everything we could possibly do for Israel. They should show some gratitude." Remember when Vance said that a couple three weeks ago? So this, this kind of messaging is is floating around in Trump's head. So, um, this visit may not be, >> but it just depends. So that's, so I've been saying what you're saying, but that's based on looking at it from the outside, and then there's another way of looking at it, another lens is some people say, what does Netanyahu have on Trump? Other people say, how much influence Netanyahu and the lobby have on Trump? Other people say, how much does Trump even matter, really, in those conversations? How many of the decisions does he make versus others in that, in that beast, in that system that is the United States? So there's all these questions that are up in the air. They make it difficult to, like, I don't know if I feel like if it was just Trump calling the shots, then why did we even get into this war? If it was Trump that said, "No more forever wars, and I want the Nobel Peace Prize for ending wars," how are we even here?

>> Yeah, well, we have the Congress also bought and paid for. They like the war. The military-industrial complex supports them. They like the war. So there's a lot of folks interested in making money in war. But that also assumes that you are going to make money. You know, there are systems that, um, well, there's two things going on, I think, in our military-industrial complex. One is this outrageous amount of money going into, um, not just AI, but computing and information technology of all types. And that is not, you can make a lot of profit there, but ultimately your manufacturing of that is zilch. Okay, it's all, it's not like a job creator. Okay? So as the military industrial complex needs fewer people, employs fewer people at home, uh, yeah, sure, there's still profit for the guys at the top, but you're not actually employing a bunch of people. And that is a, that's a problem because we hate the rich. All countries that have poor people pretty much look at the rich folks that are skimming off the top, particularly in government with government contracts. They don't like them. Like if I say Alex Karp, most people who know who he is have a negative perspective on this guy. Um, and he's not the only one. Peter Thiel, who, um, you know, is a fellow libertarian, I guess, or what he was years ago. Peter Thiel's a bad guy. Um, most of the people that hate Vance, the main reason they hate him is because he's a product of Peter Thiel. His political career was, um, subsidized by by Peter Thiel. So anyway, these guys who are, uh, working kind of for the, the new totalitarianism in in our country. That's the next phase of the military-industrial complex. They're not popular, and Congress can't do everything at once for them because there's no job benefit to do that. You know, these data centers, nobody in America wants data centers. And it's not just because they use up your water and drive up your electricity bills. It's also because you can take a massive data center, put it somewhere, and they say, "Well, how many jobs are we going to get for all those billions and billions of dollars?" And it's like anywhere from 50 to 85 people. And what are those jobs? Well, they're kind of like air conditioner repair men, okay? They're walking around making sure all the systems are running. These are not high-tech jobs. So data centers have a problem in selling how great they are because they make profit for very few and they don't create jobs. So our military transition is away from construction of things because we don't have the, we've, we've abandoned that for the most part. It's going to take decades to really get shipbuilding back or sub-building back. And we certainly can't beat, uh, what the Russians, the Indians, and the Chinese can do. We can't beat that. So, we're going to be doing more purchasing with with our military dollar, more purchasing, more IT and totalitarian surveillance type stuff, which is huge profit for few people, and very few jobs. And so, when you wean people off of those government, those those defense jobs, and the baby boomers start to die off, and they're not worried, they just care about their social security check, they're, they're good. So, then you have people disconnected from their government, which is what, how you get revolutions. And Congress knows this. The Congress members know this. You're seeing it all over in these races. How in the world did did the Democratic Socialist win the Democratic primary in in Colorado? Well, how did she do that? Well, it's a Democratic district. So, she, she and the Democrat argued Democratic principles, and she had the, she had the, the lead on justice. She had the lead on, we're not, our government should not be taking our tax dollar and murdering babies in Palestine, bombing countries for no reason and enriching the elites. Right? That's the democratic socialist message. Guess what? Very popular. It sells. It sells. And if you had a bunch of people in a military town who were all making money off the military base and, you know, lots of people had good jobs making weapons, old old-style weapons, um, then they would fight back. They would say, "No, no, you know, I like this." But they can't fight back because those jobs aren't there. So, as we blew up all of our antique stuff both in Ukraine and and lost a lot of what we thought were good systems and and technologies, uh, they were shown not to be as effective and they got blown up. Pete Hegseth wants, you know, $2 trillion to redo military acquisition. But what's he going to do with that two trillion? Let's assume he gets two trillion, even if the Israelis get half of it, right? Because this is a whole different issue, the Israelis in our system. Uh, that's also the totalitarianism that's coming. We'll have to deal with it. But the, the, uh, money that Pete Hegseth will will spend, a lot of it's going to go to the AI and the, the IT stuff, which doesn't hire a lot of people. It doesn't create jobs. AI can write you code. I mean, you could hire an AI company with 10 people and they can do what, you know, a thousand or 2,000 people might have done before that, or maybe a hundred thousand. I don't know. We also are going to have to upgrade into drones. Well, how do we do drones? It's off the shelf, commercialized. Uh, get an LLC, buy somebody else's stuff, stick an American part on it, and now you have an American drone, right? We copy, or we copy like we did the Shahed drones, we copied those. So, that also does not create a lot of high-paying jobs. Uh, that manufacturing, that kind of manufacturing is just like with cars and and other things. You got robotics to do it, computers to do it, uh, 3D printing to do it. You don't need people working at that. So that money that Trump is going to pour into the military, that Hegseth wrote a really, uh, insane article about how great the military was and how they were going to use all that money and how accountable they were for it. You know, that is not going to equate to jobs. And so now you have further disconnection between DC and the five wealthiest counties in the United States around DC, and then all the rest of the people. So Congress depends on those people to vote for them. And that's the wild card. That's what of course AIPAC and Israel are worried about. That's why they have to spend a million dollars to to to do Hosbor to to make sure people are are not alienated by Israel or whatever. But this connection, these congressmen, and it's not just the ones that are in that are hoping to get reelected. It's their competition. It's their competition like that Democratic socialist. It's the competition like Mum Dami. You know, you're like, "Huh, how could New York do that?" Well, I don't know how New York could do that. But guess what? Apparently something Dami said was way more appealing than what the other guy said. So why was it appealing? Why would, uh, you know, knocking the elite off of their ivory towers, why is that appealing? Because, because really, I mean, capitalism, we tolerate it. It's not a bad thing. But when it becomes abused, and when it becomes a target of, "Why I don't have anything, why I have all this student debt," whatever your thing is, then politics change. And so Congress will respond to that, and and we will elect a president perhaps, or have one that's that, that almost gets elected in 2028, which, who, who is going to tap into that much like Trump.

>> But then, but then what happens is when that new president with that messaging similar to Dami takes the office, and then reverts back to the same policies, because remember, Trump was that person.

>> Yeah, he was. Then people will just completely lose their [ __ ] because I think people are just on the edge. They're just really fed up by voting different person every time, getting the same results.

>> Yeah, they, they are, um, uh, they are fed up with it. And I, I'll tell you, I, I watched your, uh, really fantastic interview with Barnes, with with Robert Barnes.

>> Well, Robert is great. Yeah.

>> Yeah. And he's, he's like, he says, "Oh, it won't be 2028. It'll be the one after that, probably." But, but we are in a, in a place of, uh, you know, we're transitioning. Uh, our country is is changing, um, and and actually something has already changed, which government is not adapted to, and that is America. Americans don't want war. This Iran war was unpopular from the beginning, and even after some people, you know, we had 13 supposedly 16 casualties or something, but even after that, you know, in all the political Fox News, everything, you know, war, the war, we have to beat these terrible Iranians. And of course, we did not beat them, but I'm just saying, at no point did that war become more popular with Americans than it was. It became even less popular after the president started it, after the deep state started, after Israel started it. So, you know, that's different. That's different. That is a fundamental coalescing of a of a, uh, a true America First type of perspective in this country that's got to be dealt with. And if they don't deal with it, that's right. It will be, it'll be revolutionary. And I don't know, I hate flot cameras. Um, I thought Chris was talking about, you know, the flock cameras and stuff, but, you know, people, if there's anything that people can strike out at, and obviously we're not going to go shoot all the elites. That's not something a few might do that. Very few. But how many people or teenagers or old folks are able to take out a flot camera? And I don't mean take it out, just damage it so that it doesn't work. Those targets are everywhere, and they're not protected except obviously by other flot cameras. But, um, you know, this, this movement is very, it's very interesting, and, um, it's, it's not necessarily good, but it's just the way it is. Our government has alienated the people. But I will, I agree with you back to Iran, though, that, um, you know, it's, it's heartwarming and and amazing to watch, well, and sad to to see how the people are, uh, participating and sharing their grief. But at the same time, you're getting messages, particularly from the IRGC and others, and the people with the "Down with America" or whatever they want. They, this is, this is the end of the grieving ceremony for the most part. Once this is done, then we go forward. We finish the rebuilding and we deal with what's been done to us, not just to, um, a, you know, ham, but to the people of of Iran. And there is a lot of language which is which Americans should totally understand that says, "We're getting even," or "We are going to >> take revenge."

>> Just for people listening, what did the US do when 9/11 happened? Wars that killed tens of thousands of people, hundreds of thousands of people.

>> Um, what do you think the US would do right now if a country came in and killed Trump and bombed a school?

>> Well, we would probably >> country would be wiped out.

>> It would, we wouldn't do, we wouldn't play little military float your boat over there and and try to blockade something. We wouldn't do that. No, we, I think our, our government is, um, really irrational in so many ways. And so we would probably nuke them. We would turn them into a parking lot. And guess what? Probably, if something like that happened, 70% of the population would would cheer it. Not, not maybe not 70. Maybe 20 years ago, 70. Now maybe at least 60%, maybe 55 would cheer it. Um, there are a lot of people in America who understand there's a big difference between what Washington says wars are about and what they're really about. I mean, we have multiple generations of folks, um, Vietnam generation, the first Iraq war generation, second Iraq war, Afghanistan generation, and now our younger people who all know everything there is to know about the genocide in Gaza. Um, and yet are powerless to do anything about it. So you've got all these waves of people who understand that our government lies, and they lie particularly about war, and it's usually because they're profiting from it. So it is possible that if something like that happened, um, Americans would take that opportunity to, you know, which is what we want them to do with regime change, right? We, we go hit somebody, we knock off their leader, we put them in a war. Um, we say, "Oh, you're going to rise up and throw your government out." Well, wouldn't that be interesting if somebody hit us and, yeah, we're going to fight back, but then also we did a regime change at home. It, those, those techniques of regime change usually don't work, but the psychology of regime change, we aren't immune from that in this country. We are not immune to it at all. I mean, uh, you know, uh, honestly, I can't think of a single country, regardless of what they did to us, that would cause Americans to, young Americans, to rush down to the recruiting offices and sign up to join the military. I can't. I don't see it. And we saw that after 9/11, but at the time of 9/11, sure, we had cell phones. Um, you know, we had the internet, but we hadn't had it for very long. You know, I don't think I did much on the internet before 1995.

>> Not even close. The access of information was very different than to what it is now. Incomparable.

>> And so the narrative control from Washington through the main, what, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, they were all >> convince the Americans that Iraq made sense.

>> Yeah. Well, they did. And they lied. And it was known that they lied because I was, I was one of a number of people that were, uh, I was just a tiny portion of, I mean, actual paid journalists who, uh, were doing their job globally and in the United States were, you know, pointing out that a lot of what we were being told wasn't true. But it, we didn't have the countervailing impact of being able to find out for ourselves. You couldn't just go on the internet and find out. You couldn't. But see, now we can't. We can not only do that, we can actually talk to people in other countries. We can read what they're saying. We can watch them live. We can ask them questions. We can, I mean, there's just amazing the connectivity that we have. So I think, and and again, I would have thought that the COVID thing would not have gone as smoothly as it did from the government's perspective. I thought more people would have pushed back, and they didn't. So fear is a problem. But even with COVID, there is a whole bunch of people who bought the COVID lies, who have since then come out of that stupor and realized that, um, "Oh my god, the the government just said that because it had an agenda which we're not quite sure what it was. Maybe it was to enrich big pharma or kill old people." You know, we're not sure what the agenda was. We don't know. But it had something that it wasn't really telling us. And so, and it was also misleading us and taking advantage of our fear. So every little thing that happens, uh, the world changes, the technology, the connectivity, the information, all these things, they make us a slightly different people in a slightly different political environment. So I'm not 100% sure if we had attack. And I'll tell you this, I don't wish any harm on anybody, including Trump or any of the administration officials, and there's many of them that I despise. But if you just take Trump alone, he's such a lightning rod for antipathy and and hatred amongst the people in this country, not the MAGA people. I mean, I look, I, I've admitted and apologized for voting for him, but a lot of people, um, did not vote for him. You know, they had Trump derangement syndrome or whatever, and they really don't like him. They, they look at all the negatives that he brings to bear, which are many. So, you know, uh, you remember the guy that shot the United Healthcare CEO? I guess he's having to try.

>> I say, I mean, he's accused of it. Who knows what really happened. I mean, but the guy's gonna be.

>> Luigi.

>> Yeah. But when that happened, and I pay very little attention to, I don't know a lot about big pharma healthcare insurance companies. I didn't know who this guy was. But what surprised me was the outpouring of support for the Luigi guy. The one who was accused of doing it. Not, >> not that he was innocent. They were just assuming that he did it and they loved it. He did it. They said, "This guy."

>> That's worrying.

>> Yeah, that's so I, I'm not sure that if you killed an unpopular president, and I don't know anyone that hasn't been.

>> Oh, look what people, look, people celebrated. There's some people that celebrated the killing of, uh, Kirk. How messed up is that?

>> Oh yeah. Well, there you go. That's, I hate to say that's, >> a crazy time. Yeah, exactly. But that was a crazy, there were a lot of people, and and again, uh, the left-wing types or Democratic party types or even even some of the RINO types that didn't really like, uh, Kirk or what he was doing. Um, and they saw, and what did they, what did they, what labels did they give him? Well, he's probably, you know, a white supremacist. He might be a racist, and certainly he's a trouble man, you know. But turned out they didn't, they just, it was all, they didn't know him. They didn't read his, listen to his speeches. They didn't know him. Um, and but they, they were able to put him in a category to instantly say, "I don't like this guy." And then move to the next stage when he got killed to celebrate it and think that's great. Why don't we, too bad they didn't get his kids or something, you know? I mean, terrible things. Now, I don't like to think of my country as being filled with people like that, but unfortunately, um, we have a lot of people like that. And it doesn't, I'm not saying they would hate anybody that's killed, you know, maybe if Bernie Sanders, you know, that that they would they would be upset about that. But the way they went after the way they, the way they supported the guy that killed the United Healthcare guy, assuming he's the one that did it, they celebrated that. And and given the way Trump is held in contempt by so many people in our own country, uh, mainly because he lies so much. You know, I think, you know, don't have, you can't just keep telling people how great it is with no context because so many people are not feeling it. They just don't think it's great. They have evidence in their own lives that it's not great. And they see you making a lot of money, quote unquote, on the stock market, doing things like, you know, that no, even Biden couldn't get away with. I mean, you know, we had the Hunter Biden thing with Ukraine.

>> Exactly. Trump to a whole other level. Whole other level. It is insane the amount of money they're making. I made a joke, too.

>> Yes. I really.

>> Because I, I was, um, having a private conversation earlier. I'm like, and you know, we were told certain information, and in my mind, like, you can never trade on that information. It's not legal. So something I don't even consider.

>> But I put a joke off the cuff joke. I'm like, just imagine if we were in Trump's circle, we'd be able to trade on all that information because it's just wild the amount of money they're making, and they just trade on everything with just complete impunity. So it has taken it to a whole other level. Even I think the Iran war itself is not, look, presidents break promises all the time. It's bizarrely and unfortunately the American voters are just, you, it's expected from a president to break campaign promises. It's just a matter of which ones and to what extent.

>> But when you break the biggest promise that you make to the voters.

>> Oh yeah.

>> That's different. So, so it's like, you go to someone, you're like, "Hey, I'm going to do this, this, this, this, this, but the most important thing I'm going to do is I'm going to do that. That would be my main focus." And you go ahead and you, first thing you do is you just break that so blatantly. I just feel like it's,

>> Yeah.

>> It just, and I was saying this to Chris earlier, it, it did break a lot of people. And I, everything's, everything's possible now. Like that meeting between Netanyahu and Trump. I believe, and as you know, I've been saying it for a long time, that I think the war is over. I'm still in that camp, but I wouldn't discount that might not restart next year, or there might not be something like Israel was meant to pull out of Iran. Israel still, sorry, pull out of Lebanon. Israel's still there. Israel's still bombing Lebanon, a lot less than it was. So, it is abiding to an extent by a ceasefire, but a lot less so. Netanyahu proudly said today in a speech, he said the following. Let me get that for you. He says, um, where is it? Um, okay. "Iran wants to remove us from southern Lebanon and they are trying to put pressure on the US. We are handling this pressure well. We have received legitimacy to maintain the security zone from our great achievement against Lebanon, but they will try to eliminate it in every way, including putting pressure on the Lebanese government." Um, and then he says, "I heard reports the media claiming that Trump asked that asked us not to take action against terrorist tunnels in Lebanon." About not demolishing villages. That's what the claim is. New York Times, that's a myth, fake news. He didn't say anything to me about it, and I didn't ask him. We act according to our considerations." So here we are believing. And then he says another statement. "There will be no reconstruction in Gaza without disarmament and demilitarization in the designated area." So when you see statements like this, you look at all the rhetoric we've seen a few weeks ago, Karen, and then you look at the actions that follow.

>> Yeah.

>> Nothing's changed. Nothing seems to have changed.

>> Nope. Um, and it, and it, yeah. It, and I don't know what it will take. Obviously, you know, if Trump wanted things with Israel to change, that relationship could be shifted, even despite AIPAC, it doesn't even matter about that. Trump could, um, just from executive, uh, power that he has already, could suspend and halt and threaten to halt and all these things. And then this relationship does provide the United States, since we're providing the oversight and the political support and the aid and the military spending and the cash and the Israeli bonds, all the things that the US is providing. Each one of these things is a leverage point that could be leveraged to get Israel to get back in their borders and start behaving like a normal country. Um, but we, but Trump doesn't do that. So he doesn't want to do it, or he can't do it. Well, if he can't do it, maybe that's why he's getting himself so rich. Maybe he needs more money because otherwise he can't build a bunker that's secure enough to prevent him from being assassinated by by his Israeli, his people in Israel who are threatening him. So that's.

>> How is that something? Do I'll ask you a question that Chris asked me. How much, how much, how many of the decisions he makes are his own decisions in your mind?

>> Yeah. Well, you know, I even I used to think every Truth Social tweet that he made was his because of the weird way that he writes them, right? You know, he puts capital letters where you wouldn't have capital unless you're writing in German. You wouldn't put Americans. We don't use capital letters on everything. We don't bold-face stupid things, and we, and we don't, we don't speak in that kind of halted, uh, weird language that he uses. Nobody texts to write. Well, okay. The guy that killed the guy, the psy that killed Charlie Kirk did write texts very similar to the way Trump writes them. So maybe I'm not saying Trump did it, but there may be a family of writers that write that write to social posts. I'm not sure. But I did think he was writing those. He was producing those because of the way they're written. And I know older people sometimes people older than me write weird stuff. I don't know. And Trump, Trump has a a big personality. I thought maybe he was expressing, but it turns out I'm not sure he does that either. I, I think that whole part of some of his, his some of his writings are produced for him by others. Um, I think maybe when we think about the Trump presidency, we need to look at all the members of the Trump Board of Peace because that's most of the White House staff plus Trump's relatives and his best friend Wickoff. So, you know, and his kids, I guess, are in part, well, Kushner, son-in-law. So if you look at the Trump Board of Peace and the membership of that, then you have a circle that includes all the inside staff at the White House plus Trump's relatives. And I think that's who that's really what's governing us. And it's, it's smaller than an oligarchy. I mean, it is an oligarchy of a sort, but it's a really small. And then it interfaces with the other powers. So, yeah, but I do think Trump, or fear of Trump, is keeping some some kind of, uh, discipline in the White House, like, "Don't piss Trump off, or he'll fire you." So there is some kind of consistency in how they're going to behave. We must please Trump. So whatever is on Trump's mind, you know, how do we sell it to Trump? If we want to put something in his mind, how do we make him think he thought it up? How do we sell it? But all of this is, there's a small group of people doing that, not a large group. See, if there was a large group of people doing that, that would be like a more, I think, more normal presidency or whatever.

>> Yeah. Where you have a guy that, let's say, he goes out to the countryside or he goes meets with the governor, and he comes back with a really cool idea that he never thought, "Yeah, I met with the governor, and I know he's a Democrat, but the guy, you know, he gave me an idea, right?" That's, you could see that happening with a normal presidency or any leader, but we don't see that with Trump. Trump's ideas are coming from a very small and narrow circle of heavily populated with Zionists. And of course, that's a military state constantly, uh, you know, under risk by neighbors. You know, it's always in a lifetime, you know, existential survival battle. You know, that way of thinking, very high tech, very interested in financial things and dealings and in money and global control of, uh, via the financial system, that kind of thing. I mean, that just, that Israel is interested in that. Trump is interested in that. So this is a little circle that kind of feeds itself ideas, and no new, really new ideas come into it. Um, and I think that's the big problem. But, uh, so I don't know if Trump's completely in charge, but he does have a way of limiting the people that influence him. He's not really bringing in new people. And I, I'm going to say something really sexist, I guess it is, but, you know, how they, all the presidents, and even I remember, uh, Bush Jr. did this. You know, they always want to talk about how many women they brought in to the government, or, uh, you know, if it's, if blacks or, uh, Hispanics, you know, they're always, it's, and it's not DEI. If it is DEI, it's been around for 25 years. But this idea that that we listen to everybody, right? It's kind of a, we're America, we're a melting pot, and everybody has a chance to govern. But when I saw, and Trump has brought in women, a number of women, some very competent, into his administration. He did it the first term, he did it the second term. But there is a, there is a kind of, this is where I'm going to get catty, and I'm sorry. It's just, this is what I think. Um, you know, you look at the way the women present, and except for the World Wrestling, or the Wrestling Federation when we put in charge of the education.

department and Susie Wilds and those are women that are in their 60s. If you look at all the ones under 50, they all present in a way that is kind of reminds you of Trump's days when he ran beauty contests, right? Everybody has to look a certain way. Everybody.

You know, I want to see um, you know, I mean, I don't miss this, but you remember Biden and he put in he had some like crossdressers and he had a transvestite man woman. Yes. Woman started out as a man. Woman. She was running one of the health, I guess she was the surgeon general or something. I don't know what it was, but anyway, she was not an attractive woman. She, I'll give her that. She says she's a woman. She's a woman. But she was not like attractive. She was like, you would just run into her in Walmart, you know, that's like fine. It's all right.

But with Trump, you see appearance over everything. Appearance over competence, appearance over, uh, you know, loyalty to Trump. Um, a comp in a competition. And I, I've said this before about Pam Bondi, but that famous thing, couple months into the administration, they had something and he's going around recognizing people and he left off Pam Bondi and she goes, "But sir, I'm right here, sir." You know, like, look at me. Look at me. And again, that's not very professional. You know, in my world, in the military, if somebody didn't mention your name, you're you're in good shape. You do not want to like attract undue attention to yourself.

It's, it's a focus on the wrong things. It's, um, it's no longer a focus on merit. There's, um, a military, um, I think one of the generals that he fired, one of them, the guys he fired that put out, um, [ __ ] I didn't save it, that put out a book or something or an article, wrote an article for the first time on foreign policy and he was talking about this. He was saying that the president, I think he's talking about how the president, number one, is using the army on domestic issues and that's moving away the focus and that's stretching them too thin, and number two, he's no longer focusing on merit and that's a problem that a lot of people have. A lot of the decisions are being made are not, >> are not focusing on the right things.

Heads is a prime example. He's not, he doesn't fit into the, well, I call him the Kendall. He's the Kendall to the rest of the Barbies. But, but Headset's clearly to put a guy with with his, uh, lack of experience, knowledge, and also just judgment, um, on top of the, is your guy in the Pentagon, the overall in charge of all your generals? Um, honestly, you know, if, if we lived in a time, which Trump and all presidents think they live in, the most dangerous and, and, and time of the, you know, we have wars, we're trying to end wars, whatever. If you really believed that, then you wouldn't put an incompetent in charge of your Pentagon. You'd say, you know what, uh, some of these things aren't that important to me. Some of these positions like health and human services, there's a bunch of guys that could do that. Where do you put PY before he put him in intelligence, right? PY was up housing or something. So, yeah, it's fine. He knows a little about housing. It's not a big deal because it's not my priority.

But Trump said, you know, we're going to take Greenland. We're going to do, you know, Canada. We got Venezuela. We got all these things. We're going to be back. America is back. We got the new Dunro doctrine. Okay, that's a lot of change. That's a lot of challenge. That's a big, a big ask of the Pentagon. You think you'd put your best guy, your very smartest guy, the one who would not just have credibility in your eyes as president, but would also have credibility from the rest of the organization looking up to that guy. And he didn't do that. He pulled heads off Fox News. I mean, that was Headset's last job was Fox News mouthpiece. That's not that doesn't, that does not work. Okay. And then Headset has stumbled again and again and again. At any time people say, "Well, he's going to, he's going to fire Headset. He's going to never fired him. Hadn't fired him so far. Maybe he will. I mean, he certainly could have fired him any week of the past year and a half. He could have fired him for something he did. Um, he is incompetent. Um, not qualified to do the job. And yet, that's Trump's pick."

Now, why is that? Why? What is Trump's thinking? Loyalty, flattery. But seriously, optics are terrible in the military. That's what I don't, I don't know. I think I know which one you're talking about. Which general? Optics for the average opt? Yeah, exactly. You wrote one. But optics, when I say optics, it's not for the for the military personnel, but it's more optics for the average voter. The Fox News, uh, audience, >> you know, and and that might have worked for a while until the Iran war because he, well, obviously he screwed up when he didn't go after Epstein. That was over a year ago. But then he, this spring he screwed up again with this Iran war. So he has broken MAGA. You know, when you got Tucker and, and, uh, Margie Taylor Green, all these people talking about new parties, a new party, not new parties, not like, oh, I'm going to be a libertarian. I'm going to be a green part. They're not saying that. They're saying we're going to do what, uh, uh, Perot did in 1991 or whenever it was. We're going to, we are going to have an America First party, a real America First party, which is what you know, what was it, what was it, reform his party was the reform party. Perot, do you ever, do you remember him?

I know, yeah. I don't remember him, but I know about him. A few members, a lot of comparisons are being made to what Tucker is trying to achieve now to Perot's success. But Perot did not have particular, um, Perot's audience was really the Republican audience. I mean, the existing Republican party for the most part had been a Republican. Um, he was big in the military-industrial complex. You know, he'd made his money selling arms, fighting the first Iraq war. Um, and so, but different world from then. I mean, that was ages ago. So, what these guys are talking about, that's actually possible. I mean, you've got a bunch of non-voters. You've got probably half or two-thirds of MAGA, which is, which will never trust a Trumpite ever again. I mean, look at, look at Dan Bino. This is what happens. Dan Bunino was like, "Oh, big-time Trump guy. Everybody loves his talk show, his pod, his podcast." But then what happened when he got out? He didn't disavow Trump because he's too loyal to do that or whatever. And, uh, he can't get his numbers back. Nobody wants to hear what Dan, Dan.

Really? I didn't check that. He didn't get his numbers back. No, he didn't get them back. And Dan Bonino has, he lost a bunch of his audience. And now he's ridiculed by some of the former folks that were a part of his audience because he, he lost his credibility. He had credibility before as a podcaster because of his background experience. You know, he'd been a secret service. You know, he done, done these things, knew these people. His credibility was, was solid. And then he worked for what, couple three months and then he quit. But he didn't, he didn't throw Trump under the bus. Well, guess what? We're, we are a nation where if you quit the Trump administration, you're going to be criticized if you don't spill the spill the beans and explain why this guy lied to everybody. Why did you know, why? What caused him? If you're going to say, "Oh, no, Trump has a plan. He's playing 60 chess." And you're still saying that, nobody's listening to you.

So, I'm just saying it's a different world. So a third party, an alternative party, um, is, is, you know, I mean, our system is not geared to that, but there are plenty of people out there that would be very appealing, that would be appeal. And then, I mean, look at, look at how Tulsi, a Democrat, Tulsi Gabbard, and, uh, RFK, Democrat, lifelong Democrat, brought in disaffected, you know, MAGA people, health people, um, your average non-voting independent, and people that had had a bad experience with the, uh, health system. These guys were saying just on RFK's side and on Tulsi's side, she's anti-war. You get the anti-war vote, you get the pro-health vote, you get disaffected young Republicans and conservatives. You get your Democratic socialists who are being beat down or will be beat down soon enough by the Democratic party. You know, they're going to, they're going to make what Hillary Clinton did to Bernie Sanders look like child's play. They will not, you know, they know they that the old neocon Democrats cannot tolerate, uh, the new, the new young Democrats. So, there's tons of people who could easily come together. They're already together. They just don't know it.

So, um, that is a lot easier than what Perot did back in the day. He had to, you know, he had money. He could get himself on ballots. He only got on 20, I think, states. He wasn't even on every state ballot. So you think this time around that if they come together, if they join forces, if Massie, Kent, all of them come together, they could really make a difference.

Well, it's, it's, you know what? Okay. In politics, there, one of the things they say is like, you know, there's a cartoon. It's a cartoon. It helps you understand everything. So, uh, the politician is in front of the thing. He looks back to all the people and, um, he's, and they turn away. This is not the other one I told you where the guy walks off the cliff. This is when the politician, he's got his all people behind him, turns and looks at him and he notices they're walking another direction. The whole crowd's just moving in another direction. And the politician says, "Wait, wait. I must lead my people." And he, so he can run around and get in front of it. That's what politicians do. They need support to propel them forward. Even the worst politicians, uh, who have the worst messaging like Hitler. Well, his messaging wasn't that bad for the Germans, but Hitler couldn't have gone anywhere without a whole bunch of people saying, "Hey, this dude's saying what I think. This dude is putting it all together. I like that."

So, the politicians, when they see the movement of, uh, popular opinion and they, they understand that it's real, that people actually will not vote, no Republican or Democrat is going to get some of these people's votes. They will not vote. So, it's either, well, I could get their vote and then I could be in power. The politicians love power. This is what they're about, most of them. So, uh, yeah, the politicians will, I think they're already sensing that this, uh, sea change is happening and, and we won't see it in full this next election because only two, two years away. But, um, it's a big problem for the country, which again, let's take care of our country. Let's figure out what our politics ought to be. You know, let's give Americans a voice. Why don't we do, I hate to say America First because Trump ruined that, but, um, you know, we do need to take care of our own country. And none of that includes all these wars and it also doesn't include all of this profit-taking by American elites and by.

The profit, the profit-taking is wrong. It's morally wrong. It's such a, but for me, but for me, that bothers me. That bothers me, but nothing compared to the war. The war is just a whole other level. The war causes, you know, profit-taking. It makes a billion there, two billion there, three billion there. The war costs hundreds of billions of dollars.

And it ruins everything. I mean, you know, the, the parents of the, if you have a child that's killed in a war that should never have happened, and it did because, you know, arrogant Americans or, or arrogant Israelis or arrogant anybody that said, "This is what I want. I'm going to kill your kids." You don't get over that. You know, there's, um, and, and everybody knows this around the world. I mean, Americans watch, um, we watch all these crime shows like like Cold Cases, right? And they interview people who have lost a child 30 years ago and they finally find out who it was that killed their kid 30, 35 years later, and those parents, it, it is the exact same pain that they felt the day they their kid disappeared. Okay, so we know the cost of war. You kill people's kids, it stays with you until you end your time on earth. It does not go away. Most of the time, it's not forgiven. You know, we're not all, uh, uh, Erica Kirk, right? Where she could get up there on the day of her, two days after her husband shot and say, "Oh, I forgive the guy." You know.

I've never had time to do a deep dive into this without such a weird. You probably don't need to. But that's interesting that she would say that because even Christians, and you know, we're supposed to forgive, forgive, forgive. We have, it's hard to do it, but you're commanded, love your enemy and all that. So this is the challenge for Christians to do it. But when Erica Kirk said that, like two or three days after this happened, "Oh, this is what I want to say to the guy, I forget his name, that they said, shut, I forgive you. I forgive you." And I think the Christians in that crowd, which was most of them, most of the people in that crowd were probably, uh, Protestant Christians, for most, some Catholics. Um, you know, they're like, what? That's a little soon because we know that it's just not normal to do that. Um, anyway, the cost of, of destroying lives in, uh, land. I mean, this is, this is when you see what they're doing not just in Gaza, not just in Lebanon, but in the West Bank where it Palestinians have been, you know, they're carving up the land and using the law. They've always done that. But now you've got unleashed settlers, which really should be leashed. If they were on leashes, I think we would all be happier. But, but they're unleashed. They're they're kind of like like wild dogs, you know, in packs and they're going around setting fire to wheat fields and, you know, uprooting, uh, olive trees and stealing sheep, you know, stealing goats, walking around people's houses, knocking on the window saying, "Get out. Get out." Well, that's thug behavior. It's, it's uncivilized. And, you know, this is nobody wants that. It's just not allowed. That causes great harm. And it only takes a few stories like that. Then now that becomes part of your lived mythology, right? And, and you don't, that happens when you're 16 or 17. You really going to change your mind when you're 80? No. You know, settlers are evil. And again, the Palestinians have done a wonderful job of being kind to people. Um, I mean, people that meet them, they say, "Well, they don't talk bad about the Israelis. They talk a little bit bad about people that might have personally harmed them." And Zionism as a destructive, uh, political view. But, but they don't, they don't blame all Jews for everything. And, and the Iranians impressed us too with this. They said, "We, the Iranians know that Americans don't support the war." And they accept that. They say they don't say like, "Well, you have a, you voted for the president and that means his war is your war." They understand the difference between our government and the people. And honestly, even, even the Russians understand that. And I think, um, we understood that about the Soviet Union back in the day. You know, there was a lot of people when we thought about the Soviet Union, we say, "Well, it's their government." The Soviet people, you know, they just want to be free. They're a lot like we are, you know, uh, we would say that. But when it, when you interface directly with people that harm you or take your kids or destroy your property or injure you, you don't forget it. It is a lot of work to do that. And you know, you, it's, it's natural that the, we would hear death to America. I mean, my god, it's all, it all could have been prevented.

Exactly. How do you think Iran will be moving forward if a deal is reached or not even reached? Do you worry that maybe some commander in Iran takes a decision that drags the region back into war, drags the US back into war? Do you think Iran would seek their revenge? Maybe two, three, four, five years from now. Um, how do you think Iran would look like post this war once they have time to reflect on everything?

Yeah. Well, if anything, the, the next year or two as we try to fumble through theou and then extending theou, hopefully, and, you know, maybe getting to a different place, assuming we don't decide to forcibly rebuild all our bases and make this our top issue, which we shouldn't do. I don't think our national security strategy really includes making the Middle East our top issue. But if we don't, if we just keep kind of withdrawing and, uh, you know, leaving Iran alone, I think we'll be fine. But there is going to be great strength. Well, there's already great strength in Iran and you can see it. You can see it with the, the response to the, uh, the participation in this funeral. But there is a, a lot of folks there that want justice and, um, and not just for the manab 168. They want justice for all the wrongdoing that has been done to them and conducted against them by Tel Aviv and the United States specifically. And, uh, that's not going to go away overnight. Um, but I think what, what it should do instead of them trying to like maybe IRGC commander or somebody, you know, stoking up something, I think they're going to have, they're going to do it in unity. So, I don't think they're going to make mistakes. They haven't made any mistakes so far. They've been very cautious. You know, the things that they are celebrating or remembering in this funeral is the wisdom and the patience and how the guidance of, uh, Hommin was to make Iran strong, resilient, self-sufficient. These are the things, sovereign, these kinds of things are what I think's bringing the people together now and I think that'll hold them together. And we don't have that in this country. Sovereignty, what Donald Trump, the king, no, we don't have that. Um, we have issues at home. We have issues with Israel. Israel has never been less popular in the United States than it is now. Um, and that, that includes back in the day when, uh, we had real anti-semitism. You know, in the 40s when, uh, a lot of Americans, they did not want, you know, that was true anti-semitism, hatred of Jews. We don't have that now. We have, we have intolerance of of Zionism, and it's very widely shared. So, yeah, we're not in a good place to to do anything. I don't think and I just don't think we have it in us. Uh, no, our leadership might be crazy, but, um, but there's no, there's not going to be any followup. Like I said, nobody's going to, I don't see anything happening in the world, whether it's the Middle East or any place else that would cause literally three or four million young men and women, uh, 16 to 24, rushing into their recruitment offices. I see nothing.

That's, that's something that should not happening. We don't believe in it. We're not doing it. Nobody's going to do that. Um,

Yeah, I think this is, this is a self-reflection that is really needed, hopefully post this war for the US and for the Western world. I think it's not just the US. But, um, Karen, thank you as always. It's a pleasure to chat to you.

Yeah, same here. Thanks, Mario. Um.