Krystal and Saagar discuss unhinged CNN and Fox war propaganda, Dems absent on antiwar pushback, John Mearsheimer exposes Israel lobby.
John Mearsheimer: https://www.mearsheimer.com/
Scott Horton: https://scotthorton.org/
To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.com
Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Speaker 2 (00:01):
Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
and we are so excited about what that means for
the future of the show.
Speaker 3 (00:08):
This is the only place where you can find honest
perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
So if that is something that's important to you, please
go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 3 (00:25):
We need your help to build the future of independent
news media, and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
dot com.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
Let's turn to the media now. They're a big reason
why we're actually in this mess, and you can.
Speaker 3 (00:38):
Look from CNN to Fox News for choice clips of
everybody celebrating this war talking about how great of an
idea it is. Let's start off with Van Jones, the
alleged progressive over at CNN, dispensing some great democratic wisdom.
Speaker 1 (00:51):
Here's what he had to say before the strikes went off.
Speaker 4 (00:54):
He's buying himself some time in some room. I was
also in the Holy Land very recently. I think progresses
underestimate how dangerous Iran is. Iran is not a normal country.
Normal countries don't blind women because they showed some hair.
They don't empower little gangs and proxies to surround the
(01:18):
country and fire rockets and rape people. So Iran, the
two things are clear. What they cannot have a bomb
and the why. Because they say death to America, death
to Israel, and death to all the Jews. One of
those should offend you. If you're progressives, at least one
should offend you. And so the question, though, is the
(01:39):
who and how. Is Israel gonna take out this nuclear
capacity by dropping people there who blow it up, or
is America going to take it out by dropping a
bomb that blows it up. But the what and the
why are clear, and I think progressors should get on
board with that. We cannot have a nuclear armed Iran.
I was in the region, you were in the region.
(01:59):
This is a very very dangerous power that cannot get
a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
He just got back from the Holy Land. He's got
all this wisdom to drop on all of us. What
else he got for us? Van Yeah, tell us more.
By the way, if you continue to watch CNN, it's
not just the esteem Van Jones to make that case.
They also trot out CNN analyst John Bolton, former Trump
national security advisor.
Speaker 1 (02:20):
Here's what he had to say.
Speaker 5 (02:21):
Were you surprised that President Trump took such decisive action?
Speaker 6 (02:25):
Well, let me say this unequivocally. I think President Trump
made the right decision for America to attack Iran's nuclear
weapons program. And I think we're on the verge of
potentially saying regime change in Iran as part of that.
I think this is a huge change in the Middle East.
It was a decisive action. It was the right thing
(02:47):
to do. I thought somebody should do it for a
long time. But better late than never.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
Better late than never, such decisive action.
Speaker 3 (02:54):
I mean, look even at the framing of the questions
continuing on CNN, let's put this up there on the
screen analysis they write, US strikes mark a stunning demonstration
of military might and presidential powers.
Speaker 1 (03:06):
You know, stuff like this.
Speaker 3 (03:07):
Really annoys the shit out of me, because, let's think
about it, given the trillion dollars that we pay, yeah,
we better have some goddamn military might, and you know
a president, of course, we are the capital of the
global empire. It actually humiliating if the military might didn't work.
Considering how much money went into the development of the
massive ordinance penetrator, the the B two bomber, the amount
(03:30):
that we spend just maintaining.
Speaker 1 (03:32):
This entire thing.
Speaker 3 (03:33):
It's like all of the assumptions and things that are
built into that. But this is why we are where
we are. And Fox is far more to pleaan because
literally they're the ones that Trump is relying on and
imbibing all of this bs from. But if you're quote
unquote you know centrist boomer, this is what you're ingesting
all day long, and that's what leads to the bipartisan
(03:55):
support for war. That's you know, especially just echoing what
Scott just said here, the framing is everything. Yeah, and
if you listen to this crap, you would think they're
ten seconds away from a nucritar bomb. Yeah, just bullsh
It's complete fake, it's wrong.
Speaker 2 (04:08):
Well, and just even if you take Van Jones's framing
here of they can't have a bomb, okay, well, you
know what was working and much more likely to succeed
at preventing their intention of developing a nuclear weapon. Here
diplomacy the type that Obama engaged in, the type that
Trump was engaging in before whoever came in and convinced
(04:29):
him that you should have this poison pill of absolutely
zero enrichment. That's what actually has a chance of success.
But the minute that you say and you commit the
military to we must do whatever it takes to prevent
even the possibility of them developing a nuclear weapons something.
By the way, and I really want you guys to
think about this. A couple months ago, was this the
(04:52):
top of mind priority. No, it's been completely fabricated right
now in real time. But as soon as you commit
that we have to make make sure we have to
preclude even the possibility that they could develop a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 7 (05:05):
You are in regime change City, which.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Is exactly where we are, and you can hear the
cynical weaponization of identity politics from Van Jones. Oh my god,
the chance we must invade them because of the chance
and the horrible treatment of women. Hey, how are women
treated in Saudi Arabia as one example, how does it
go there? How are ethnic minorities treated in our great
friend and allies Israel? How are people treated there in
(05:28):
the West Bank? And how's that genocide in Gaza going?
Do we need to you know, is there any priority
there for you to stop shipping the American weapons that
are enabling that those atrocities from of course not, of
course not, of course not. It is all so incredibly
cynical and lasting on the stand endpoint, because it's really
important that people understand what is being done to them.
(05:50):
On that panel with Van Jones, I saw, you know,
Scott Jennings there nodding his hat along.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
Was there wants to bomb? I actually advocated for Trump
to Bombara? Yes, and so correct.
Speaker 2 (05:58):
It is a died in the wol neocon delighted right
now at everything that's going now. I want to know,
I didn't see a single anti war voice on that
panel they're bringing, Like, why do we need to hear
from John Bolton? Why do we need to hear anything
from John Bolton?
Speaker 7 (06:12):
Right now?
Speaker 2 (06:12):
The number of people from the past who have been wrong,
who have advocated for some of the most disastrous foreign
policy decisions in American history, or the number of people
who are affiliated with the IDF, with the foreign government
who they trod on to provide quote unquote analysis is
extraordinary as well. So the way this is framed, the guests,
(06:33):
they choose the story selections. You're starting to hear all
this to oh my god, the Iranian sleeper cells in
the United States as so CNN had a chiron to
that regard as well. I think we have that somewhere
in these elements. But in any case, all of this
is meant to make you afraid. It's meant to frame
this as like an existential crisis. We have to stop
(06:54):
them from getting a bomb now. And once people have
accepted that framing, then there is no end, no limit
to how far they will go. And we're already like
speed run through that escalatory chain. It really is extraordinary.
Like you've said this a r I think it's such
a great point. I could never have imagined that we
would do the Iraq War only more dumber, you know, dumber,
(07:16):
more brazen, like more disastrous, larger country. Like the whole
thing is just so surreal to watch it all unfold.
Speaker 3 (07:25):
Yeah, we're not there yet, but in a sense, like
the dumbness of it all represents our current media environment
and they don't even try. You know, look again, the
Bush administration did their propaganda case for over a year,
so dom they concocted all this fake intelligence. They went
to Congress, they got everybody on the record. They went
to the United Nations Colon Powell and his famous speech,
(07:46):
the quote the legitimacy of the war in Iraq was
far more, you know, amongst the American people and the world,
and really, you know, set the stage for why Bush
was able to survive in the four election. Trump is
just like, now I'm going to own this entire thing.
I'm gonna do this all by myself. A quote, I
don't care what my own director of National Intelligence says.
I only care what the Israelis say. And you know,
(08:07):
this is where we're at. And yet the media environment is, honestly,
I still think worse today than it has ever been,
especially on Cable, considering their iron grip both on the
president's mind and on all of our high propensity boomer
voters who run our fate. And just take a look
at what they're what Donald Trump, one of those boomers,
is taking in over on Fox from Mark Levin, who,
(08:29):
in my opinion, is probably you know, if we were
to say, who is a Judy Miller's one of the
most responsible media figures for the war in Iraq because
of the whole curveball uranium thing. I would say Mark
Levin is probably the single most impactful person for the
reason why Donald Trump want to instruct Iran. Take a
listen to how he's celebrating it on Fox News.
Speaker 8 (08:48):
Western Europe is weak. That's why wars start in Western Europe.
That's why World Work one started there and World War
two started there. And I would tell the demigods in
our country, were you going on about World War three?
Donald Trump just prevented World War three by using the
United States military to stop it.
Speaker 3 (09:09):
Donald Trump just prevented World War three. Also, I do
you know these people are so dumb that it just
it stuns the mind. Europe was weak and that's why
World War one started. I mean, for somebody like me,
that's just too much. It literally a raging but that
look again, this level of stupidity, this low IQ argumentation,
the thorn in the side just complete. You know, propaganda
(09:32):
from Mark Levin is one of the most successful propaganda
campaigns of all time.
Speaker 1 (09:37):
Let's all just admit it.
Speaker 3 (09:37):
I mean, New York Times has a bunch of reporting
out this morning, but Fox News and Donald Trump watching
Fox the celebration of the Israeli strikes and all of
the analysts that they have on May had a major
role in him claiming credit for the Israeli military campaign
and for the eventual strike in the first place. We
can In fact, many of his own advisors were like,
I wish Tucker still worked at Fox because then he
(09:58):
would hear some sort of a posing viewpoint nothing I mean,
And yeah, maybe that's why the murdocks fired him, right,
but just shows you, like that, hold on Donald Trump,
all this alternative media podcast stuff, it's all bullshit. It
had no influence whatsoever on his decision making, even though
he relied on them to get elected, or at least
according to him, was a big reason why he got elected.
Speaker 1 (10:19):
Yeah, go ahead and ask.
Speaker 3 (10:21):
There's a New York Times profile of Andrew Schultz out
this morning. He's like, one of the main reasons supported
Trump was about foreign wars, and now.
Speaker 1 (10:26):
I'm upset about it. Look it's all right there.
Speaker 2 (10:28):
Yeah, yeah, Well, in that some of that New York
Times reporting to they say that Trump made the decision.
Speaker 7 (10:35):
You know, it was a while ago. Trump made the decision.
Speaker 2 (10:37):
So all of the like, you know, o abandons at
the White House and oh jd Vance called the Israelism
was very upset. They they've already admitted that that story
was completely fake. So a lot of I mean, everything
that unfolded in the will he or won't He weak
was theater.
Speaker 7 (10:51):
It was theater.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
He had made the decision to go forward with this,
and he was trying to throw them off this end
and you know, destabilize the information environment, so they weren't
sure or ultimately what was going to happen. And with
Mark Levin, I mean, it's worse than Jdi Miller because
she laundered the administration's talking points. He's not only laundering
the administration's talking points and creating the administration's talking points
(11:14):
using anti war rhetoric claiming he stopped World War three,
which I'm hearing from a number of like MAGA aligned
neocon types. But he also was actually in the room
during the persuasion. So he's on all sides of this
in terms of, you know, a nefarious influence here. But
this is you know, it's not just him. I just
(11:34):
want people to get a sense. I know you've been
watching Fox News more than I have, and the level
of propaganda that is coming out is just I mean,
it is straight drinking straight from the fire. Hydrant just
in your face, celebrate, Oh my god, we're so bad
as and how could you possibly be against this? Let's
go ahead and take a listen to a little bit
of the rhetoric that's playing out there.
Speaker 9 (11:55):
Anyone who says this war isn't good is either with
the rich or has something to gain from it. And
I look at, you know, even in America, I look
at the people and the influencers that are talking poorly
about you know, this possibility that just happened tonight, and
it makes you wonder, you know, why, why are they
(12:16):
all of a sudden against taking out the nuclear capability
of Iran?
Speaker 1 (12:21):
Well, you're not with us here against him?
Speaker 2 (12:23):
Yeah, And she does that little thing at the end,
she goes you just have to ask why now all
of a sudden And it's the same trick that Ted
Cruz pulled with Tucker Cruz, Ed Cruce pulled a Tucker
Carlson where you know, oh, why are you so obsessed
with Israel? Why are you so interested in the Jews?
And for those of us who were you know, I
(12:44):
was in college during the Iraq war build up, and
Saga remembers, well, because he was politically inclined even as
a child.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
But all my class matated me because I was talking
about Iraq.
Speaker 2 (12:55):
Everyone who was anti war, we were smeared as traders,
terror loving. Now we are going to be smeared as
terror loving traders who are also bigoted, anti semis that
it happens.
Speaker 1 (13:08):
It's everything that's old is new again.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
I mean, and I wish, but I want to just
really quick, I want to underscore this because it's going
to be on steroids because in two thousand and three,
we didn't have AI, we didn't have Palenteer, we didn't
have you know, the sort of authoritarian tactics that we've
seen play out already to crush dissent, whether it's calling
up the thousands of National Guards and Marines into an
American city. By the way, they're still there even though
(13:32):
there's literally no protests anymore, kidnapping students off the street.
Mahmud Khalil, by the way, guys, was just released already
out protesting for Palestine.
Speaker 7 (13:40):
Again. What an absolute legend that man is.
Speaker 2 (13:42):
But you know, blocking any going through social media to
make sure you haven't said the wrong thing about Israel, like,
all of these tactics are going to be deployed against
an anti war movement. The rhetorical tactics, the surveillance tactics,
the authoritarian tactics.
Speaker 7 (13:59):
It will be because this.
Speaker 2 (14:01):
Some of these tools were not available in two thousand
and three. So I want you to understand what is
coming and what they're already setting us up for. And
you know, listen, Democrats participated and helping create the possibility
of this rhetorical trick of claiming everyone who opposes the
interest of the foreign nation of Israel is an anti Semite,
and they are going to hit that messaging so hard.
Speaker 7 (14:23):
They're going to move.
Speaker 2 (14:23):
From what that lady did of like sort of alluding
to it, vaguely suggesting it too. They will come right
out and say that anyone who was opposed to this
war is an anti semi mark my words.
Speaker 1 (14:33):
Oh absolutely, it's going to happen.
Speaker 3 (14:34):
And look, Patriot Act two point zero, that's not out
of the question. And if things really get into it,
the Trump administration.
Speaker 1 (14:40):
They're going to roll us. Okay, all everybody, and so
be prepared.
Speaker 3 (14:43):
Be prepared, because you know, freedom fries and all of that.
That seemed insane, but you know, the vast majority of
a lot of people they supported it, it took years
to actually come back and yeah, it's just absolutely devastating.
Why don't we move on to the Democrats here and
to talk about their reaction.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Yeah, so completely pathetic in many regards, especially from the leadership.
Not going to say there haven't been any good reactions.
And I think the base so far has really showed
up in a positive way.
Speaker 7 (15:15):
But even the people who you.
Speaker 2 (15:17):
Know, like I'm about to show you Adam Schiff, who
want to oppose this war because they don't like Trump,
they frame it in all this like procedural garbage. Like
what I'm really outraged about is you don't give me
the proper briefing before this happened, or this is like
that's the worst one.
Speaker 7 (15:34):
The next level up.
Speaker 2 (15:35):
Is the War Power Star Resolution, which, by the way,
is important. It's important to have that vote and get
everybody on the record. But guys just say you're against war.
It's really not that freaking hard here in any case
is Adam Schiff doing his whole like they didn't give
me the briefing, And that's what I'm really upset about.
Speaker 7 (15:51):
Let's take a listen.
Speaker 10 (15:52):
The failure to brief Democratic lawmakers the making this just
another partisan exercise by the administration. When it comes to
something as serious as the decision to potentially engage in
warfare with another nation, it means that you're not going
to have the whole country bought into this, which is
a real problem. If everything goes well, then maybe it
(16:15):
works out fine in the sense of not being an
issue that tears a part of the American people. But
if things don't go well, if Iran retaliates, if we
get in an escalating war with Iran, and you don't
have the country bought in because the president didn't seek
the approval of Congress, because he didn't make the case
(16:36):
of the American people, because he didn't even inform one
of the parties in Congress. That's when you have a
real problem engaging in warfare on a partisan basis. So
a lot of risks here for the country, which you
know is the reason why you come to Congress in
the first place, is the reason why our constitution says
(16:56):
Congress has the power to declare war, not the president.
Speaker 2 (17:00):
Yeah, scandal, he didn't breathe you and that man is
a senator now, by the way, which is just like
disturbing Andrew Cuomo also out with a sad statement about
the process here and how bad the process was.
Speaker 7 (17:12):
We could put this up on.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
The screen D two going into going into election day.
Ron cannot have nuclear capability, that's number one. So he's
validating the frame right onto the gates, and many of
these Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries do a similar thing. Aron
can't have nuclear capability, that's number one. I don't support
the way he did it. I believe he should have
consulted Congress. This is Trump saying I don't have to
(17:34):
follow the rules. So it's he didn't follow the rules.
But you know he supports like iron can't have any
so he completely validates the framing and then his only
quibble is like he didn't quite go about it in
the quite in the right procedural process way.
Speaker 7 (17:49):
Just completely ridiculous.
Speaker 2 (17:51):
Meanwhile, you know, if you want to look for a
study in contrast and someone who actually is getting it right,
as he did during the Iraq War, one of the
few Bernie's Anders was actually doing one of his rallies
on the Fight Oligarchy tour in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and he
received the news live while he's up there speaking to
the crowd. I think he was about to wrap his speech,
and you hear a woman yell out from the crowd.
(18:13):
Trump just bombed a ron and then fash Heir, his
aid runs up with the with the Trump tweet, and
Bernie reads it out. Let's go ahead and take a
listen to the organic crowd reaction at this Bernie Sanders rally.
Speaker 7 (18:26):
Let's take a listen.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Oh I just gave me the kills.
Speaker 11 (18:40):
Let me.
Speaker 1 (18:44):
Oh your god, Oh your god.
Speaker 11 (18:52):
Oh god. This is a statement statement from Donald.
Speaker 4 (19:00):
Oh, dear god, we have completed a very successful with
three new real sights and a one.
Speaker 7 (19:12):
And they go on to chant no more war.
Speaker 2 (19:15):
Birdie put on a statement and listen, guys, this is
this is the way to do it. The headline of
the statement is no war with a run not.
Speaker 7 (19:23):
They didn't give me a briefing.
Speaker 2 (19:24):
And he concludes by saying, the American people were lied
to about Vietnam with tragic consequences. American people were lied
to about a rock with tragic consequences. The American people
are being lied to again today. We cannot allow history
to repeat itself. The US faces enormous problems here at
home which we must addressed we cannot allow ourselves to
be dragged into another Middle East war based on lies.
Speaker 7 (19:45):
How hard is that to say?
Speaker 1 (19:46):
Soccer?
Speaker 7 (19:46):
How hard does that?
Speaker 3 (19:47):
It's not apparently very difficult, but it does show you,
you know, democratic leadership is a Joe Kaking, Jeffries, Chuck Schumer.
They need to reac as Rocana has ethics demonstrated, but
that crowd reaction shows you. Look, I mean, the opportunity
is there for the taking if you want it, if
you want it, so look, we'll give some credit also
where it's doe. Senator Tim Kaine spoke out against this
(20:10):
very forcefully.
Speaker 1 (20:11):
Let's take a listen.
Speaker 5 (20:12):
Well, the Vice President was on another network earlier this
morning and said, we are not at war with Iran,
we are at war with Iran's nuclear program. There seems
to be a lot of legal person on the definition
of the word war here. What do you make of
that description?
Speaker 12 (20:28):
I think it's bs and I think anybody hearing it
would conclude the same thing when you're bombing another nation,
asked them if they think it's war?
Speaker 13 (20:38):
They do?
Speaker 12 (20:39):
Would we think it was war if Iran bombed a
US nuclear facility, of course we would, and the US
we've invaded two neighbors of Iran, Afghanistan, and Iraq to
topple their regimes since two thousand.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
Those were wars.
Speaker 12 (20:57):
This is the US jumping into a war of choice
at Donald Trump's urging, without any compelling national security interest
for the United States to act in this way, particularly
without a debate and vote in Congress. We should not
be sending troops and risking troops lives in an offensive
war without a debate in Congress.
Speaker 2 (21:16):
So he says, you know, offensive war of choice makes
the Iraq war comparison. He was the first person in
the Senate to jump out with a war powers resolution.
By the way, let's put the last piece up on
the screen here, the War Powers resolution. Where we are
with the numbers, So you've got sixty members of Congress,
which is pathetic. There should be so many more, maybe
more of signed on today who have signed on to
(21:38):
the effort led by Massey. But he's the only Republican
who has joined this effort either in the House or
the Senate. So you've got fifty nine Democrats one Republican
after the attack, This was actually I was happy to
see this. Chuck Schumer announced support for the War Powers
Act is urging all centers to vote for it, so
that's something at.
Speaker 7 (21:57):
Least, but you know, it's utterly pathetic.
Speaker 2 (21:59):
There's one Republican on this thing after all the like,
oh we're anti war, blah blah blah. But you know,
to focus in on the Democratic the Democrats here sober.
There is also some scheming afoot as well, because there's
an alternative war Powers resolution that's being offered by several
APAC aligned Democratic members right now that you know, I'm
(22:24):
sure is meant to somehow we can and screw with
and undercut this effort that is going forward, which again important.
Speaker 7 (22:31):
To have this vote. It was.
Speaker 2 (22:33):
It's important to know where everybody stands and to get
those votes on the record because everyone who votes for
this war needs to be primaried and turfed out of office.
So we need to have hard and fast where were
you at this point in time and what did you
have to say?
Speaker 13 (22:46):
But the.
Speaker 2 (22:48):
Message needs to be no war, that's it, not you
didn't brief me, not you didn't take the vote, not
you didn't follow.
Speaker 7 (22:54):
The rules, No war with Iran.
Speaker 2 (22:57):
This is an offensive war of choice, It is an
illegal war. There was no national security interest here. That
is the message, and we are being led into war
once again, just like we were back at a rock.
It's history repeating itself. That's what these people need to say.
And the fact that there are so few of them
who could just just be cynical. Just see the political
opening here. There's already been, by the way, a dozen
(23:19):
anti war protests and cities across the country, and this thing,
you know, this thing is just getting kicked off. So
the bases with you, independence are with you. There is
a massive political opening here that they just can't seem
to be able to seize on.
Speaker 3 (23:33):
Yeah, especially you know, I wouldn't bet I'm not saying
Zoron didn't do a lot of work, but I wouldn't
bet against the strikes having at least some impact on
some of his latest polling. If he does win, at
least at a narrative level, you should look at that.
And there's a lot of young people right who will
be furious. I actually know some of my friends who
live in New York who are like, that's it, I'm
voting for Zorm because they're specifically just pissed off about
how Cuomo and everybody else is so aligned with the
(23:55):
Israeli war machines. So yeah, take take advantage, all right,
But listen, they never learned, they never will, or maybe
they will.
Speaker 1 (24:02):
I don't know. We'll continue to track it. Here on
the show.
Speaker 3 (24:04):
We do have John Mehersheimer standing Brian, Professor John Meihshimer.
Speaker 1 (24:07):
Let's get to it.
Speaker 3 (24:10):
Very excited now to be joined by Professor John Meihershchimer
of the University of Chicago, one of my personal heroes. Sir,
thank you very much for joining us again.
Speaker 13 (24:18):
My pleasure to be here, absolutely.
Speaker 3 (24:20):
All right, So let's get into a Professor, you've long
warned about the circumstances around this. Now we have the
situation where the United States has struck Uranian nuclear facilities.
We want to get your reactions, specifically to the way
that Israel has dragged the United States into this situation,
something you've warned about for quite some time. Here we're
going to play a little bit from Prime Minister Netan Yahoo.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
We're going to get your reaction. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 11 (24:41):
Congratulations, President Trump. Your bold decision to target Iran's nuclear
facilities with the awesome and righteous mind of the United
States will change history. In Operation Rising Line, Israel has
done truly amazing things. But in tonight's action against Iran's
nuclear facilities, America has been truly unsurpassed. It has done
(25:07):
what no other country on Earth could do. History will
record that President Trump acted to deny the world's most
dangerous regime the world's most dangerous weapons. His leadership today
has created a pivot of history that can help lead
the Middle East and beyond to a future of prosperity
(25:29):
and peace. President Trump and I often say peace through strength.
First come strength, then comes peace.
Speaker 3 (25:39):
Professor, what do you make of BB's comments there and
where things go from here?
Speaker 13 (25:43):
Well, I actually think he's delusional. I think the argument
that we have solved the nuclear problem with Iran is wrong,
And if anything, it's more likely than ever that Iran
will get nuclear weapons. Almost everybody I know argues that
if Iran wants nuclear weapons, there's nothing you can do
(26:07):
to prevent them from getting nuclear weapons. They have so
much know how, they have so much capability, And even
if we were to destroy all of the existing facilities,
they could rebuild them underneath a bigger mountain and eventually
nuclear weapons. And furthermore, when you attack them like this,
(26:30):
you give them greater incentive than ever to actually go
get nuclear weapons. Watching what's been happening, one says to oneself,
why didn't they get nuclear weapons earlier? This wouldn't have
happened if they had nuclear deterrent. So I would argue that,
first of all, we did not get all of their
nuclear infrastructure. We did not destroy all of their nuclear capability. Secondly,
(26:55):
even if we did, they can rebuild it. And third
they now have a great incentive than ever to get
nuclear weapons. So we have not solved the nuclear problem
by doing this.
Speaker 2 (27:07):
Professor, what is your understanding of the pressures that were
brought to bear that led us to this point of
being directly engaged in what Trump is now saying, in
true social may well be a regime change war.
Speaker 13 (27:20):
Yeah, well, just quickly, to talk about regime change is
changing the objective here. Trump initially said that this was
simply about taking out or Rand's nuclear capability. He probably
now realizes that we have not done that, cannot do that.
So now we're talking about regime change on the assumption
(27:41):
that if we put in a new regime that those
new Iranian leaders are not going to want nuclear weapons.
This too, is delusional. What Iranian in his or her
right mind, doesn't want a nuclear deterrent at this point
in time. Furthermore, we're not going to get regime change
in all likelihood if you look at what's happening inside Iran,
(28:02):
what's happening, and what the historical record always says happens
in these cases, that the people are coming together to
support the regime and there's a rally around the flag effect.
So I think this is not going to work to
cause regime change anymore than it's going to work to
eliminate the nuclear capability. Now, with regard to your question
(28:23):
about the influence of Israel and the lobby on the
United States, the influence of the lobby in the United
States is awesome. There's just no question about that. This
is a war for Israel. Basically, the Israel firsters trump
the American firsters, and it's hardly surprising. We've seen it
many times and will undoubtedly see it many times moving forward.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
Professor, you know, one of the things you've always warned
about as well is about this realignment not only with
Iran but also with the other powers. We could put
this here up on the screen. A reaction from Dmitri Medvedev,
the former president of Russia. He says, here, what have
the Americans accomplished with their nighttime strikes on these nuclear
sites in Iran? Critical infrastructure appears to only been affected
(29:08):
sustainably minor damage.
Speaker 1 (29:10):
He says.
Speaker 3 (29:10):
Iran's political regime has survived in all likelihood, has come
out even stronger. The people are rallying around the country
spiritual leadership. But the most important line was a number
of countries are ready to supply Iran with their own
nuclear warheads. What do you make of this warning from
the Russians and what the follow on effects of this
will be throughout the world, You know, the destruction perhaps
(29:32):
of the non plural Aspiration Treaty, the incentive for states
opposed to the United States and to the West to
pursue a nuclear weapons program.
Speaker 13 (29:42):
Well, there are a number of different issues here. First
of all, I don't think that there's any country with
nuclear weapons that would give nuclear warheads to Iran. I
think the only possibility is Pakistan, and I don't think
that that's in the cards. Could be wrong, but I
don't think that's in the cards. I think the greater
(30:03):
dangerous I said before, is that Iran will develop its
own nuclear weapons. With regard to the NPT and the
nuclear proliferation regime that we've established over the years, which
has been so effective, I think this is a hammer
blow to that regime. I think almost everybody agrees about
that point. The fact is that the message from what
(30:27):
has happened in Iran is that you should have nuclear
weapons because that is they are the ultimate detern That's
the only way you can ensure that Israel in the
United States won't do a tag team attack on you.
Just look at Kim Jong un in North Korea. He
developed nuclear weapons. He's sitting He's sitting happily in Pyongyang
(30:51):
because he knows we're not going to attack him because
he has nuclear weapons. If you look at what happened
in Libya, what happened in Syria, what's now happening in Ukraine,
and what's happening in Iran, it's quite clear that you
want to have nuclear weapons. They are the ultimate deterrent.
So I think this has done great damage to the
(31:13):
nuclear proliferation regime. With regard to our reputation around the world,
I mean, the United States is correctly seen as a
road state even in East Asia. Today allies like Japan
and South Korea are basically condemning US for what we've done.
I mean, what can you say about the United States?
I mean, first of all the duplicatest diplomacy here, and
(31:35):
then this idea that we have to right just to
run around the world attacking countries whenever we see fit. Furthermore,
let's not lose sight of the fact that the United
States is supporting the Israeli genocide in Gaza. This is
much worse than anything that's happening to the Iranians. There's
a genocide taking place, the Israelis are executing it, and
(31:58):
we're complicit in this, implicitus in this. I mean, I
think America's reputation is in tatters. Sure, were the most
powerful state on the planet, and countries have to be
very careful in their criticism of US. But I think
almost everybody outside of Israel, in the United States and
a few European leaders, understands that the United States is
(32:20):
basically out of control.
Speaker 2 (32:22):
Let's talk a little bit more about Gaza and how
this fits in this picture. I can put E three
up on the screen, which is just, you know, the
latest article in the ongoing hell and ongoing genocide that
is being perpetrated inside of Gaza. This is from Haratz,
which is an Israeli newspaper, says, as living space in
Gaza shrinks, remaining pockets endure hellish conditions, nearly two million
(32:43):
people crammed now into less than eighteen percent of Gaza.
This is all of course getting now much less attention
because now the world is focused on this war with Iran,
you know, the war. The Israeli initial strikes, of course,
done with our support, were launched at a time when
there was increasing public and global discontent with the continuation
(33:08):
of this genocide. Do you see those two things as
linked in terms of what led to this particular timing.
Speaker 13 (33:17):
Yes. I think that the Israelis have always understood that
the best chance for cleansing Gaza and the West Bank
was in the context of a big war. October seventh,
of course, provided the pretext for bombing Gaza and starting
the genocide. And there's no question in my mind that
(33:41):
the Israelis understood that if they started a war against Iran,
the focus would be on Iran, especially if they brought
the Americans in, and that would leave them free to
ramp up the genocide and possibly drive the Palestinians out
of Gaza. I mean, it's very clear that that is
their goal. And then the question you have to ask
(34:02):
yourself is, given that goal, what is the best way
for them to achieve that end? And it's quite clear
to me that starting a major war with Iran goes
a long way towards helping them cleanse gossip.
Speaker 3 (34:17):
So what do you think that how does this fit again?
You know, kind of returning to the global picture, we
could put the next one here up on the screen,
which is about this recently completed Iranian Chinese freight line.
Now nobody's claiming, you know, that this would be able
to replace the Straits of WARMUS. But if there is
a larger US military intervention, what will that lead to,
you know, in terms of US power that's able to
(34:39):
project in East Asia and elsewhere along with our reputation,
What is the logical conclusion that adversarial states would want
to make after further US involvement here in the Middle East.
Speaker 13 (34:52):
Well, look, there's no question that American policymakers believe that
the principal threat that the United States faces today is
from China. China is widely seen as a pure competitor,
and the United States has been interested in pivoting to
Asia since twenty eleven, when Hillary Clinton, who was then
(35:13):
Secretary of State, said We're going to pivot to Asia,
but we cannot pivot to Asia in any meaningful way,
in large part because of the Ukraine War and what's
going on in the Middle East. And if you look
at all the naval and air assets that we have
in the Middle East now that should be in East Asia,
you see that we have greatly weakened our strategic situation
(35:38):
in East Asia, and we are in a poor position
at this point in time for purposes of containing China.
This is not in our interest. And of course this
shows you what an albatross Israel is around our neck.
So there's no doubt that in terms of basic American
grand strategy, this is not good. And if you hypothesize
(36:03):
the situation where we're stuck in the Middle East for
months on end, this is an even worse situation. With
regard to our reputation. I think our reputation has been
badly damaged. I think there's no question about that, and
I think it will only get worse. And by the way,
one thing we haven't talked about is what the consequences
(36:24):
will be for Donald Trump on the home front. I mean,
Trump is betting that this is sort of a one
and done operation. We went in, we did the dirty work,
we solved the problem, and now we can celebrate, have
a victory parade or what have you. I don't think
this is the way this one's going to play out.
I don't think the Iranians are going to roll over
(36:46):
and play dead. I think we're probably going to have
to launch further operations against I Ran military operations that
is down the road, and there's no evidence that this
one is going to be settled quickly. And as I
said before, I think the Iranians, if anything, you're going
to get nuclear weapons and they're going to continue down
the nuclear road. And Trump is going to have egg
(37:07):
on his face. It's not going to be a great victory.
People are going to question why we did this, and
so I think he's going to have problems on the
home front as a result of all this.
Speaker 1 (37:17):
Totally agree, Professor.
Speaker 2 (37:19):
How do you separate out the influence of the Israel
lobby and the genuine ideological belief among many American elite
political leaders that endless support for Israel does directly serve
the interest of American empire. Like, for example, I think
Joe Biden was a very sincere, ideological Zionist who was
(37:41):
ideologically committed to supporting Israel come hell or high water.
How do you separate those two things out.
Speaker 13 (37:49):
Well, it is somewhat difficult to separate him out. But
the key point to remember is that any policymaker or
any politician or aspiring politician who criticizes Israel will find
out very quickly that that person has the lobby's gun
(38:11):
sights on him or her. The lobby will go to
great lengths to destroy that person's career and make sure
that he or she never gets elected to office. We'll
figure this out very quickly. And they also understand that
if you support Israel hook line and sinker, you'll get
big time support from the lobby, someone like Lindsey Graham
(38:34):
or Tom Cotton. They benefit enormously from making arguments that
the lobby finds in Israel's interest. If you're a general
in the American military and you're thinking about what you're
going to do after you retire, you understand full well
that if you criticize Israel, it'll be very hard to
find a job once you retire. And at the same time,
(38:58):
you understand that if you supp for it Israel, if
you back it and you push the American military to
do things that are said to be in Israel's interest,
your job prospects once you retire will be much better.
I could go on and on about this. Yeah, but
Israel lobby has enormous influence in the United States. There
(39:19):
is no case in the historical record that even comes
close to this every time.
Speaker 2 (39:25):
Do you think that grip is loosening at all? We
were just talking about the New York City mayoral race
Andrew Cuomo and Zoronman Donnie and he's been the supporter
of BDS, you know, calls it a genocide and Palestine
this is Zoran. And Andrew Cuomo is you know, very
much the APAC backed candidate, And I don't know who's
going to win, but he's certainly giving Cuomo run for
(39:46):
his money.
Speaker 7 (39:46):
You also have a number.
Speaker 2 (39:47):
Of vocal critics in Congress who have now survived that
APAC onslaught people like Rasheta Telei, people like on the
right Thomas Massey. So do you think that some of
that influence is beginning to crack in age well.
Speaker 13 (40:02):
Two points. One is that there's no question that the
lobby is in deep trouble and Israel is in deep trouble.
When you talk about the public at large, the word
is now out thanks to shows like yours and all
sorts of other alternative media sites. The fact is that
the word is out that Israel is committing a genocide,
(40:25):
that Israel is a strategic liability, that Israel drags us
into wars like this, and so forth and so on.
The problem is that the Israeli lobby or the Israel
lobby is still deadly effective at the policy level. They
have a lock on American policy makers, and people like
Thomas Massey and others are small in number. They're just
(40:47):
not many people at the policy level are willing to
contest the Israelis. So what has to happen here is
that the public opinion has to translate into a change
policy level. And I think the only place where that's
possible is in the Democratic Party. It doesn't look like
it's at all possible in the Republican Party. But if
(41:08):
you look at the polls and you look at how
young Democrats and this includes, by the way, many young
American Jews were deeply disaffected by what's happening here for
good moral and strategic reasons. But I think that's the hope.
Speaker 1 (41:23):
Yeah, you know, start on a personal level.
Speaker 3 (41:25):
You know, I read your book in two thousand and eight,
The Israel Lobby, huge influence, hugely influential. I read a
lot about realism and restraint, and I learned so much
from you just through your pages. Is it surreal to
watch the neo cons again get a victory.
Speaker 1 (41:39):
I didn't think it would happen.
Speaker 3 (41:41):
I know, I've seen the popularization of your work from
that time to today. We have this broad restraint community,
and I feel like it's all completely failed. You know,
just to watch it all happen again, to see Lindsey Graham,
to see Fox News Mark Levin, What is it like
for you, having lived through this twice now, to watch
the you know, the war drums beat the same people
(42:01):
who are wrong previously get to claim a victory.
Speaker 1 (42:04):
Lab It just seems so surreal to me.
Speaker 13 (42:06):
It does seem surreal. I mean, sometimes, as you would expect,
I'm guilty of wishful thinking, and I want to believe
that the lobby's power will be curved, and we will
do the right thing, both strategically and morally. But it happens,
it turns out very quickly that that is wishful thinking,
(42:27):
and you realize that the lobby is as powerful as ever.
And this is all to say that I think, moving
forward over the next couple months and even over the
next couple of years, the lobby will have a lock
on American policy and they will push us to do
things in the Middle East that are not in our interest.
I don't see Donald Trump contesting the lobby in any
(42:51):
meaningful way. He's a guy who likes to talk tough,
but ultimately he's not very tough. And when it comes
to Israel, just look at what he did in his
first term and what he's done since taking office in
his second term, and there is no reason to think
that he's going to contest Israel in any meaningful way.
Speaker 2 (43:11):
Professor, My last question for you here is under the
Obama administration that Israel lobby did take one significant blow,
which was the successful negotiation of the JCPO way.
Speaker 7 (43:21):
What do you think that created the conditions.
Speaker 2 (43:23):
That made that deal possible? Even though you know Bby
at now who came here and preached to Congress.
Speaker 7 (43:29):
You had a.
Speaker 2 (43:30):
Robust debate, a huge propaganda effort to try to kill
that deal, and it was able to ultimately go through.
So what do you think created that possibility?
Speaker 13 (43:39):
Well, I think that Obama fully understood that the lobby
was powerful, but nevertheless its policies were not good for
the United States. I think he understood that Israel is
an albatross around their neck. He would never say that publicly,
(43:59):
but I'll I'm fully confident that he understood that, and
he understood that getting a deal with Iran made sense,
and he worked over time to fashion a deal. And
he had the benefit that he had a number of
European countries, the French, the British, and the Germans, plus
the Russians, plus the Chinese on his side, and he
(44:21):
was able to barely push through the JCPOA, the nuclear
agreement with Iran. He took tremendous heat along the way
from the Israelis and from the lobby. And then when
Trump came to power in twenty seventeen January twenty seventeen,
he made it clear that he was going to do
(44:42):
away with the JCPOA, and of course in twenty eighteen,
the summer of twenty eighteen, he walked away from it.
And then you want to remember that when we started,
when we started dealing with this issue again, when the
Trump administration started dealing with this issue again a few
months ago, Steve Whitcoff and Trump himself, we're talking about
(45:05):
working out a deal that looked like the JCPOA. The
lobby then moved in, unsurprisingly, and the lobby made it
clear to Whitcoff and to Trump that there was not
going to be a deal like the JCPOA, and Witcoff
and Trump both did one hundred and eighty degree turns,
said the Iranians cannot have any nuclear enrichment at all,
(45:27):
which was allowed in the original JCPOA, and the Iranians
said that was unacceptable. And here we are today. So
what is the bottom line. The bottom line is that
common sense won a victory during the Obama period, but
that was quickly overturned. That victory was quickly overturned by Trump.
(45:51):
And then it looked like Trump might win a victory
for common sense this time, and it was quickly returned
by the lobby. So you see the power of the
lobby at every turn, it's almost impossible for a president
to have any maneuver room when it comes to dealing
with issues that are dear to israel Is hard.
Speaker 3 (46:12):
There you go, well, sir, thank you very much for
joining us. We always appreciate your voice and hope to
see you again soon.
Speaker 7 (46:17):
Thank you very thank you, professor, you're welcome.
Speaker 3 (46:20):
Thank you guys so much for watching. We really appreciate it.
We're go a great show for you tomorrow.
Speaker 1 (46:24):
We'll see them
Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal here.
Speaker 2 (00:01):
Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
and we are so excited about what that means for
the future of the show.
Speaker 3 (00:08):
This is the only place where you can find honest
perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
not exist anywhere else.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
So if that is something that's important to you, please
go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
Speaker 3 (00:25):
We need your help to build the future of independent
news media, and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
dot com.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
Let's turn to the media now. They're a big reason
why we're actually in this mess, and you can.
Speaker 3 (00:38):
Look from CNN to Fox News for choice clips of
everybody celebrating this war talking about how great of an
idea it is. Let's start off with Van Jones, the
alleged progressive over at CNN, dispensing some great democratic wisdom.
Speaker 1 (00:51):
Here's what he had to say before the strikes went off.
Speaker 4 (00:54):
He's buying himself some time in some room. I was
also in the Holy Land very recently. I think progresses
underestimate how dangerous Iran is. Iran is not a normal country.
Normal countries don't blind women because they showed some hair.
They don't empower little gangs and proxies to surround the
(01:18):
country and fire rockets and rape people. So Iran, the
two things are clear. What they cannot have a bomb
and the why. Because they say death to America, death
to Israel, and death to all the Jews. One of
those should offend you. If you're progressives, at least one
should offend you. And so the question, though, is the
(01:39):
who and how. Is Israel gonna take out this nuclear
capacity by dropping people there who blow it up, or
is America going to take it out by dropping a
bomb that blows it up. But the what and the
why are clear, and I think progressors should get on
board with that. We cannot have a nuclear armed Iran.
I was in the region, you were in the region.
(01:59):
This is a very very dangerous power that cannot get
a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
He just got back from the Holy Land. He's got
all this wisdom to drop on all of us. What
else he got for us? Van Yeah, tell us more.
By the way, if you continue to watch CNN, it's
not just the esteem Van Jones to make that case.
They also trot out CNN analyst John Bolton, former Trump
national security advisor.
Speaker 1 (02:20):
Here's what he had to say.
Speaker 5 (02:21):
Were you surprised that President Trump took such decisive action?
Speaker 6 (02:25):
Well, let me say this unequivocally. I think President Trump
made the right decision for America to attack Iran's nuclear
weapons program. And I think we're on the verge of
potentially saying regime change in Iran as part of that.
I think this is a huge change in the Middle East.
It was a decisive action. It was the right thing
(02:47):
to do. I thought somebody should do it for a
long time. But better late than never.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
Better late than never, such decisive action.
Speaker 3 (02:54):
I mean, look even at the framing of the questions
continuing on CNN, let's put this up there on the
screen analysis they write, US strikes mark a stunning demonstration
of military might and presidential powers.
Speaker 1 (03:06):
You know, stuff like this.
Speaker 3 (03:07):
Really annoys the shit out of me, because, let's think
about it, given the trillion dollars that we pay, yeah,
we better have some goddamn military might, and you know
a president, of course, we are the capital of the
global empire. It actually humiliating if the military might didn't work.
Considering how much money went into the development of the
massive ordinance penetrator, the the B two bomber, the amount
(03:30):
that we spend just maintaining.
Speaker 1 (03:32):
This entire thing.
Speaker 3 (03:33):
It's like all of the assumptions and things that are
built into that. But this is why we are where
we are. And Fox is far more to pleaan because
literally they're the ones that Trump is relying on and
imbibing all of this bs from. But if you're quote
unquote you know centrist boomer, this is what you're ingesting
all day long, and that's what leads to the bipartisan
(03:55):
support for war. That's you know, especially just echoing what
Scott just said here, the framing is everything. Yeah, and
if you listen to this crap, you would think they're
ten seconds away from a nucritar bomb. Yeah, just bullsh
It's complete fake, it's wrong.
Speaker 2 (04:08):
Well, and just even if you take Van Jones's framing
here of they can't have a bomb, okay, well, you
know what was working and much more likely to succeed
at preventing their intention of developing a nuclear weapon. Here
diplomacy the type that Obama engaged in, the type that
Trump was engaging in before whoever came in and convinced
(04:29):
him that you should have this poison pill of absolutely
zero enrichment. That's what actually has a chance of success.
But the minute that you say and you commit the
military to we must do whatever it takes to prevent
even the possibility of them developing a nuclear weapons something.
By the way, and I really want you guys to
think about this. A couple months ago, was this the
(04:52):
top of mind priority. No, it's been completely fabricated right
now in real time. But as soon as you commit
that we have to make make sure we have to
preclude even the possibility that they could develop a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 7 (05:05):
You are in regime change City, which.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Is exactly where we are, and you can hear the
cynical weaponization of identity politics from Van Jones. Oh my god,
the chance we must invade them because of the chance
and the horrible treatment of women. Hey, how are women
treated in Saudi Arabia as one example, how does it
go there? How are ethnic minorities treated in our great
friend and allies Israel? How are people treated there in
(05:28):
the West Bank? And how's that genocide in Gaza going?
Do we need to you know, is there any priority
there for you to stop shipping the American weapons that
are enabling that those atrocities from of course not, of
course not, of course not. It is all so incredibly
cynical and lasting on the stand endpoint, because it's really
important that people understand what is being done to them.
(05:50):
On that panel with Van Jones, I saw, you know,
Scott Jennings there nodding his hat along.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
Was there wants to bomb? I actually advocated for Trump
to Bombara? Yes, and so correct.
Speaker 2 (05:58):
It is a died in the wol neocon delighted right
now at everything that's going now. I want to know,
I didn't see a single anti war voice on that
panel they're bringing, Like, why do we need to hear
from John Bolton? Why do we need to hear anything
from John Bolton?
Speaker 7 (06:12):
Right now?
Speaker 2 (06:12):
The number of people from the past who have been wrong,
who have advocated for some of the most disastrous foreign
policy decisions in American history, or the number of people
who are affiliated with the IDF, with the foreign government
who they trod on to provide quote unquote analysis is
extraordinary as well. So the way this is framed, the guests,
(06:33):
they choose the story selections. You're starting to hear all
this to oh my god, the Iranian sleeper cells in
the United States as so CNN had a chiron to
that regard as well. I think we have that somewhere
in these elements. But in any case, all of this
is meant to make you afraid. It's meant to frame
this as like an existential crisis. We have to stop
(06:54):
them from getting a bomb now. And once people have
accepted that framing, then there is no end, no limit
to how far they will go. And we're already like
speed run through that escalatory chain. It really is extraordinary.
Like you've said this a r I think it's such
a great point. I could never have imagined that we
would do the Iraq War only more dumber, you know, dumber,
(07:16):
more brazen, like more disastrous, larger country. Like the whole
thing is just so surreal to watch it all unfold.
Speaker 3 (07:25):
Yeah, we're not there yet, but in a sense, like
the dumbness of it all represents our current media environment
and they don't even try. You know, look again, the
Bush administration did their propaganda case for over a year,
so dom they concocted all this fake intelligence. They went
to Congress, they got everybody on the record. They went
to the United Nations Colon Powell and his famous speech,
(07:46):
the quote the legitimacy of the war in Iraq was
far more, you know, amongst the American people and the world,
and really, you know, set the stage for why Bush
was able to survive in the four election. Trump is
just like, now I'm going to own this entire thing.
I'm gonna do this all by myself. A quote, I
don't care what my own director of National Intelligence says.
I only care what the Israelis say. And you know,
(08:07):
this is where we're at. And yet the media environment is, honestly,
I still think worse today than it has ever been,
especially on Cable, considering their iron grip both on the
president's mind and on all of our high propensity boomer
voters who run our fate. And just take a look
at what they're what Donald Trump, one of those boomers,
is taking in over on Fox from Mark Levin, who,
(08:29):
in my opinion, is probably you know, if we were
to say, who is a Judy Miller's one of the
most responsible media figures for the war in Iraq because
of the whole curveball uranium thing. I would say Mark
Levin is probably the single most impactful person for the
reason why Donald Trump want to instruct Iran. Take a
listen to how he's celebrating it on Fox News.
Speaker 8 (08:48):
Western Europe is weak. That's why wars start in Western Europe.
That's why World Work one started there and World War
two started there. And I would tell the demigods in
our country, were you going on about World War three?
Donald Trump just prevented World War three by using the
United States military to stop it.
Speaker 3 (09:09):
Donald Trump just prevented World War three. Also, I do
you know these people are so dumb that it just
it stuns the mind. Europe was weak and that's why
World War one started. I mean, for somebody like me,
that's just too much. It literally a raging but that
look again, this level of stupidity, this low IQ argumentation,
the thorn in the side just complete. You know, propaganda
(09:32):
from Mark Levin is one of the most successful propaganda
campaigns of all time.
Speaker 1 (09:37):
Let's all just admit it.
Speaker 3 (09:37):
I mean, New York Times has a bunch of reporting
out this morning, but Fox News and Donald Trump watching
Fox the celebration of the Israeli strikes and all of
the analysts that they have on May had a major
role in him claiming credit for the Israeli military campaign
and for the eventual strike in the first place. We
can In fact, many of his own advisors were like,
I wish Tucker still worked at Fox because then he
(09:58):
would hear some sort of a posing viewpoint nothing I mean,
And yeah, maybe that's why the murdocks fired him, right,
but just shows you, like that, hold on Donald Trump,
all this alternative media podcast stuff, it's all bullshit. It
had no influence whatsoever on his decision making, even though
he relied on them to get elected, or at least
according to him, was a big reason why he got elected.
Speaker 1 (10:19):
Yeah, go ahead and ask.
Speaker 3 (10:21):
There's a New York Times profile of Andrew Schultz out
this morning. He's like, one of the main reasons supported
Trump was about foreign wars, and now.
Speaker 1 (10:26):
I'm upset about it. Look it's all right there.
Speaker 2 (10:28):
Yeah, yeah, Well, in that some of that New York
Times reporting to they say that Trump made the decision.
Speaker 7 (10:35):
You know, it was a while ago. Trump made the decision.
Speaker 2 (10:37):
So all of the like, you know, o abandons at
the White House and oh jd Vance called the Israelism
was very upset. They they've already admitted that that story
was completely fake. So a lot of I mean, everything
that unfolded in the will he or won't He weak
was theater.
Speaker 7 (10:51):
It was theater.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
He had made the decision to go forward with this,
and he was trying to throw them off this end
and you know, destabilize the information environment, so they weren't
sure or ultimately what was going to happen. And with
Mark Levin, I mean, it's worse than Jdi Miller because
she laundered the administration's talking points. He's not only laundering
the administration's talking points and creating the administration's talking points
(11:14):
using anti war rhetoric claiming he stopped World War three,
which I'm hearing from a number of like MAGA aligned
neocon types. But he also was actually in the room
during the persuasion. So he's on all sides of this
in terms of, you know, a nefarious influence here. But
this is you know, it's not just him. I just
(11:34):
want people to get a sense. I know you've been
watching Fox News more than I have, and the level
of propaganda that is coming out is just I mean,
it is straight drinking straight from the fire. Hydrant just
in your face, celebrate, Oh my god, we're so bad
as and how could you possibly be against this? Let's
go ahead and take a listen to a little bit
of the rhetoric that's playing out there.
Speaker 9 (11:55):
Anyone who says this war isn't good is either with
the rich or has something to gain from it. And
I look at, you know, even in America, I look
at the people and the influencers that are talking poorly
about you know, this possibility that just happened tonight, and
it makes you wonder, you know, why, why are they
(12:16):
all of a sudden against taking out the nuclear capability
of Iran?
Speaker 1 (12:21):
Well, you're not with us here against him?
Speaker 2 (12:23):
Yeah, And she does that little thing at the end,
she goes you just have to ask why now all
of a sudden And it's the same trick that Ted
Cruz pulled with Tucker Cruz, Ed Cruce pulled a Tucker
Carlson where you know, oh, why are you so obsessed
with Israel? Why are you so interested in the Jews?
And for those of us who were you know, I
(12:44):
was in college during the Iraq war build up, and
Saga remembers, well, because he was politically inclined even as
a child.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
But all my class matated me because I was talking
about Iraq.
Speaker 2 (12:55):
Everyone who was anti war, we were smeared as traders,
terror loving. Now we are going to be smeared as
terror loving traders who are also bigoted, anti semis that
it happens.
Speaker 1 (13:08):
It's everything that's old is new again.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
I mean, and I wish, but I want to just
really quick, I want to underscore this because it's going
to be on steroids because in two thousand and three,
we didn't have AI, we didn't have Palenteer, we didn't
have you know, the sort of authoritarian tactics that we've
seen play out already to crush dissent, whether it's calling
up the thousands of National Guards and Marines into an
American city. By the way, they're still there even though
(13:32):
there's literally no protests anymore, kidnapping students off the street.
Mahmud Khalil, by the way, guys, was just released already
out protesting for Palestine.
Speaker 7 (13:40):
Again. What an absolute legend that man is.
Speaker 2 (13:42):
But you know, blocking any going through social media to
make sure you haven't said the wrong thing about Israel, like,
all of these tactics are going to be deployed against
an anti war movement. The rhetorical tactics, the surveillance tactics,
the authoritarian tactics.
Speaker 7 (13:59):
It will be because this.
Speaker 2 (14:01):
Some of these tools were not available in two thousand
and three. So I want you to understand what is
coming and what they're already setting us up for. And
you know, listen, Democrats participated and helping create the possibility
of this rhetorical trick of claiming everyone who opposes the
interest of the foreign nation of Israel is an anti Semite,
and they are going to hit that messaging so hard.
Speaker 7 (14:23):
They're going to move.
Speaker 2 (14:23):
From what that lady did of like sort of alluding
to it, vaguely suggesting it too. They will come right
out and say that anyone who was opposed to this
war is an anti semi mark my words.
Speaker 1 (14:33):
Oh absolutely, it's going to happen.
Speaker 3 (14:34):
And look, Patriot Act two point zero, that's not out
of the question. And if things really get into it,
the Trump administration.
Speaker 1 (14:40):
They're going to roll us. Okay, all everybody, and so
be prepared.
Speaker 3 (14:43):
Be prepared, because you know, freedom fries and all of that.
That seemed insane, but you know, the vast majority of
a lot of people they supported it, it took years
to actually come back and yeah, it's just absolutely devastating.
Why don't we move on to the Democrats here and
to talk about their reaction.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Yeah, so completely pathetic in many regards, especially from the leadership.
Not going to say there haven't been any good reactions.
And I think the base so far has really showed
up in a positive way.
Speaker 7 (15:15):
But even the people who you.
Speaker 2 (15:17):
Know, like I'm about to show you Adam Schiff, who
want to oppose this war because they don't like Trump,
they frame it in all this like procedural garbage. Like
what I'm really outraged about is you don't give me
the proper briefing before this happened, or this is like
that's the worst one.
Speaker 7 (15:34):
The next level up.
Speaker 2 (15:35):
Is the War Power Star Resolution, which, by the way,
is important. It's important to have that vote and get
everybody on the record. But guys just say you're against war.
It's really not that freaking hard here in any case
is Adam Schiff doing his whole like they didn't give
me the briefing, And that's what I'm really upset about.
Speaker 7 (15:51):
Let's take a listen.
Speaker 10 (15:52):
The failure to brief Democratic lawmakers the making this just
another partisan exercise by the administration. When it comes to
something as serious as the decision to potentially engage in
warfare with another nation, it means that you're not going
to have the whole country bought into this, which is
a real problem. If everything goes well, then maybe it
(16:15):
works out fine in the sense of not being an
issue that tears a part of the American people. But
if things don't go well, if Iran retaliates, if we
get in an escalating war with Iran, and you don't
have the country bought in because the president didn't seek
the approval of Congress, because he didn't make the case
(16:36):
of the American people, because he didn't even inform one
of the parties in Congress. That's when you have a
real problem engaging in warfare on a partisan basis. So
a lot of risks here for the country, which you
know is the reason why you come to Congress in
the first place, is the reason why our constitution says
(16:56):
Congress has the power to declare war, not the president.
Speaker 2 (17:00):
Yeah, scandal, he didn't breathe you and that man is
a senator now, by the way, which is just like
disturbing Andrew Cuomo also out with a sad statement about
the process here and how bad the process was.
Speaker 7 (17:12):
We could put this up on.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
The screen D two going into going into election day.
Ron cannot have nuclear capability, that's number one. So he's
validating the frame right onto the gates, and many of
these Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries do a similar thing. Aron
can't have nuclear capability, that's number one. I don't support
the way he did it. I believe he should have
consulted Congress. This is Trump saying I don't have to
(17:34):
follow the rules. So it's he didn't follow the rules.
But you know he supports like iron can't have any
so he completely validates the framing and then his only
quibble is like he didn't quite go about it in
the quite in the right procedural process way.
Speaker 7 (17:49):
Just completely ridiculous.
Speaker 2 (17:51):
Meanwhile, you know, if you want to look for a
study in contrast and someone who actually is getting it right,
as he did during the Iraq War, one of the
few Bernie's Anders was actually doing one of his rallies
on the Fight Oligarchy tour in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and he
received the news live while he's up there speaking to
the crowd. I think he was about to wrap his speech,
and you hear a woman yell out from the crowd.
(18:13):
Trump just bombed a ron and then fash Heir, his
aid runs up with the with the Trump tweet, and
Bernie reads it out. Let's go ahead and take a
listen to the organic crowd reaction at this Bernie Sanders rally.
Speaker 7 (18:26):
Let's take a listen.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Oh I just gave me the kills.
Speaker 11 (18:40):
Let me.
Speaker 1 (18:44):
Oh your god, Oh your god.
Speaker 11 (18:52):
Oh god. This is a statement statement from Donald.
Speaker 4 (19:00):
Oh, dear god, we have completed a very successful with
three new real sights and a one.
Speaker 7 (19:12):
And they go on to chant no more war.
Speaker 2 (19:15):
Birdie put on a statement and listen, guys, this is
this is the way to do it. The headline of
the statement is no war with a run not.
Speaker 7 (19:23):
They didn't give me a briefing.
Speaker 2 (19:24):
And he concludes by saying, the American people were lied
to about Vietnam with tragic consequences. American people were lied
to about a rock with tragic consequences. The American people
are being lied to again today. We cannot allow history
to repeat itself. The US faces enormous problems here at
home which we must addressed we cannot allow ourselves to
be dragged into another Middle East war based on lies.
Speaker 7 (19:45):
How hard is that to say?
Speaker 1 (19:46):
Soccer?
Speaker 7 (19:46):
How hard does that?
Speaker 3 (19:47):
It's not apparently very difficult, but it does show you,
you know, democratic leadership is a Joe Kaking, Jeffries, Chuck Schumer.
They need to reac as Rocana has ethics demonstrated, but
that crowd reaction shows you. Look, I mean, the opportunity
is there for the taking if you want it, if
you want it, so look, we'll give some credit also
where it's doe. Senator Tim Kaine spoke out against this
(20:10):
very forcefully.
Speaker 1 (20:11):
Let's take a listen.
Speaker 5 (20:12):
Well, the Vice President was on another network earlier this
morning and said, we are not at war with Iran,
we are at war with Iran's nuclear program. There seems
to be a lot of legal person on the definition
of the word war here. What do you make of
that description?
Speaker 12 (20:28):
I think it's bs and I think anybody hearing it
would conclude the same thing when you're bombing another nation,
asked them if they think it's war?
Speaker 13 (20:38):
They do?
Speaker 12 (20:39):
Would we think it was war if Iran bombed a
US nuclear facility, of course we would, and the US
we've invaded two neighbors of Iran, Afghanistan, and Iraq to
topple their regimes since two thousand.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
Those were wars.
Speaker 12 (20:57):
This is the US jumping into a war of choice
at Donald Trump's urging, without any compelling national security interest
for the United States to act in this way, particularly
without a debate and vote in Congress. We should not
be sending troops and risking troops lives in an offensive
war without a debate in Congress.
Speaker 2 (21:16):
So he says, you know, offensive war of choice makes
the Iraq war comparison. He was the first person in
the Senate to jump out with a war powers resolution.
By the way, let's put the last piece up on
the screen here, the War Powers resolution. Where we are
with the numbers, So you've got sixty members of Congress,
which is pathetic. There should be so many more, maybe
more of signed on today who have signed on to
(21:38):
the effort led by Massey. But he's the only Republican
who has joined this effort either in the House or
the Senate. So you've got fifty nine Democrats one Republican
after the attack, This was actually I was happy to
see this. Chuck Schumer announced support for the War Powers
Act is urging all centers to vote for it, so
that's something at.
Speaker 7 (21:57):
Least, but you know, it's utterly pathetic.
Speaker 2 (21:59):
There's one Republican on this thing after all the like,
oh we're anti war, blah blah blah. But you know,
to focus in on the Democratic the Democrats here sober.
There is also some scheming afoot as well, because there's
an alternative war Powers resolution that's being offered by several
APAC aligned Democratic members right now that you know, I'm
(22:24):
sure is meant to somehow we can and screw with
and undercut this effort that is going forward, which again important.
Speaker 7 (22:31):
To have this vote. It was.
Speaker 2 (22:33):
It's important to know where everybody stands and to get
those votes on the record because everyone who votes for
this war needs to be primaried and turfed out of office.
So we need to have hard and fast where were
you at this point in time and what did you
have to say?
Speaker 13 (22:46):
But the.
Speaker 2 (22:48):
Message needs to be no war, that's it, not you
didn't brief me, not you didn't take the vote, not
you didn't follow.
Speaker 7 (22:54):
The rules, No war with Iran.
Speaker 2 (22:57):
This is an offensive war of choice, It is an
illegal war. There was no national security interest here. That
is the message, and we are being led into war
once again, just like we were back at a rock.
It's history repeating itself. That's what these people need to say.
And the fact that there are so few of them
who could just just be cynical. Just see the political
opening here. There's already been, by the way, a dozen
(23:19):
anti war protests and cities across the country, and this thing,
you know, this thing is just getting kicked off. So
the bases with you, independence are with you. There is
a massive political opening here that they just can't seem
to be able to seize on.
Speaker 3 (23:33):
Yeah, especially you know, I wouldn't bet I'm not saying
Zoron didn't do a lot of work, but I wouldn't
bet against the strikes having at least some impact on
some of his latest polling. If he does win, at
least at a narrative level, you should look at that.
And there's a lot of young people right who will
be furious. I actually know some of my friends who
live in New York who are like, that's it, I'm
voting for Zorm because they're specifically just pissed off about
how Cuomo and everybody else is so aligned with the
(23:55):
Israeli war machines. So yeah, take take advantage, all right,
But listen, they never learned, they never will, or maybe
they will.
Speaker 1 (24:02):
I don't know. We'll continue to track it. Here on
the show.
Speaker 3 (24:04):
We do have John Mehersheimer standing Brian, Professor John Meihshimer.
Speaker 1 (24:07):
Let's get to it.
Speaker 3 (24:10):
Very excited now to be joined by Professor John Meihershchimer
of the University of Chicago, one of my personal heroes. Sir,
thank you very much for joining us again.
Speaker 13 (24:18):
My pleasure to be here, absolutely.
Speaker 3 (24:20):
All right, So let's get into a Professor, you've long
warned about the circumstances around this. Now we have the
situation where the United States has struck Uranian nuclear facilities.
We want to get your reactions, specifically to the way
that Israel has dragged the United States into this situation,
something you've warned about for quite some time. Here we're
going to play a little bit from Prime Minister Netan Yahoo.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
We're going to get your reaction. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 11 (24:41):
Congratulations, President Trump. Your bold decision to target Iran's nuclear
facilities with the awesome and righteous mind of the United
States will change history. In Operation Rising Line, Israel has
done truly amazing things. But in tonight's action against Iran's
nuclear facilities, America has been truly unsurpassed. It has done
(25:07):
what no other country on Earth could do. History will
record that President Trump acted to deny the world's most
dangerous regime the world's most dangerous weapons. His leadership today
has created a pivot of history that can help lead
the Middle East and beyond to a future of prosperity
(25:29):
and peace. President Trump and I often say peace through strength.
First come strength, then comes peace.
Speaker 3 (25:39):
Professor, what do you make of BB's comments there and
where things go from here?
Speaker 13 (25:43):
Well, I actually think he's delusional. I think the argument
that we have solved the nuclear problem with Iran is wrong,
And if anything, it's more likely than ever that Iran
will get nuclear weapons. Almost everybody I know argues that
if Iran wants nuclear weapons, there's nothing you can do
(26:07):
to prevent them from getting nuclear weapons. They have so
much know how, they have so much capability, And even
if we were to destroy all of the existing facilities,
they could rebuild them underneath a bigger mountain and eventually
nuclear weapons. And furthermore, when you attack them like this,
(26:30):
you give them greater incentive than ever to actually go
get nuclear weapons. Watching what's been happening, one says to oneself,
why didn't they get nuclear weapons earlier? This wouldn't have
happened if they had nuclear deterrent. So I would argue that,
first of all, we did not get all of their
nuclear infrastructure. We did not destroy all of their nuclear capability. Secondly,
(26:55):
even if we did, they can rebuild it. And third
they now have a great incentive than ever to get
nuclear weapons. So we have not solved the nuclear problem
by doing this.
Speaker 2 (27:07):
Professor, what is your understanding of the pressures that were
brought to bear that led us to this point of
being directly engaged in what Trump is now saying, in
true social may well be a regime change war.
Speaker 13 (27:20):
Yeah, well, just quickly, to talk about regime change is
changing the objective here. Trump initially said that this was
simply about taking out or Rand's nuclear capability. He probably
now realizes that we have not done that, cannot do that.
So now we're talking about regime change on the assumption
(27:41):
that if we put in a new regime that those
new Iranian leaders are not going to want nuclear weapons.
This too, is delusional. What Iranian in his or her
right mind, doesn't want a nuclear deterrent at this point
in time. Furthermore, we're not going to get regime change
in all likelihood if you look at what's happening inside Iran,
(28:02):
what's happening, and what the historical record always says happens
in these cases, that the people are coming together to
support the regime and there's a rally around the flag effect.
So I think this is not going to work to
cause regime change anymore than it's going to work to
eliminate the nuclear capability. Now, with regard to your question
(28:23):
about the influence of Israel and the lobby on the
United States, the influence of the lobby in the United
States is awesome. There's just no question about that. This
is a war for Israel. Basically, the Israel firsters trump
the American firsters, and it's hardly surprising. We've seen it
many times and will undoubtedly see it many times moving forward.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
Professor, you know, one of the things you've always warned
about as well is about this realignment not only with
Iran but also with the other powers. We could put
this here up on the screen. A reaction from Dmitri Medvedev,
the former president of Russia. He says, here, what have
the Americans accomplished with their nighttime strikes on these nuclear
sites in Iran? Critical infrastructure appears to only been affected
(29:08):
sustainably minor damage.
Speaker 1 (29:10):
He says.
Speaker 3 (29:10):
Iran's political regime has survived in all likelihood, has come
out even stronger. The people are rallying around the country
spiritual leadership. But the most important line was a number
of countries are ready to supply Iran with their own
nuclear warheads. What do you make of this warning from
the Russians and what the follow on effects of this
will be throughout the world, You know, the destruction perhaps
(29:32):
of the non plural Aspiration Treaty, the incentive for states
opposed to the United States and to the West to
pursue a nuclear weapons program.
Speaker 13 (29:42):
Well, there are a number of different issues here. First
of all, I don't think that there's any country with
nuclear weapons that would give nuclear warheads to Iran. I
think the only possibility is Pakistan, and I don't think
that that's in the cards. Could be wrong, but I
don't think that's in the cards. I think the greater
(30:03):
dangerous I said before, is that Iran will develop its
own nuclear weapons. With regard to the NPT and the
nuclear proliferation regime that we've established over the years, which
has been so effective, I think this is a hammer
blow to that regime. I think almost everybody agrees about
that point. The fact is that the message from what
(30:27):
has happened in Iran is that you should have nuclear
weapons because that is they are the ultimate detern That's
the only way you can ensure that Israel in the
United States won't do a tag team attack on you.
Just look at Kim Jong un in North Korea. He
developed nuclear weapons. He's sitting He's sitting happily in Pyongyang
(30:51):
because he knows we're not going to attack him because
he has nuclear weapons. If you look at what happened
in Libya, what happened in Syria, what's now happening in Ukraine,
and what's happening in Iran, it's quite clear that you
want to have nuclear weapons. They are the ultimate deterrent.
So I think this has done great damage to the
(31:13):
nuclear proliferation regime. With regard to our reputation around the world,
I mean, the United States is correctly seen as a
road state even in East Asia. Today allies like Japan
and South Korea are basically condemning US for what we've done.
I mean, what can you say about the United States?
I mean, first of all the duplicatest diplomacy here, and
(31:35):
then this idea that we have to right just to
run around the world attacking countries whenever we see fit. Furthermore,
let's not lose sight of the fact that the United
States is supporting the Israeli genocide in Gaza. This is
much worse than anything that's happening to the Iranians. There's
a genocide taking place, the Israelis are executing it, and
(31:58):
we're complicit in this, implicitus in this. I mean, I
think America's reputation is in tatters. Sure, were the most
powerful state on the planet, and countries have to be
very careful in their criticism of US. But I think
almost everybody outside of Israel, in the United States and
a few European leaders, understands that the United States is
(32:20):
basically out of control.
Speaker 2 (32:22):
Let's talk a little bit more about Gaza and how
this fits in this picture. I can put E three
up on the screen, which is just, you know, the
latest article in the ongoing hell and ongoing genocide that
is being perpetrated inside of Gaza. This is from Haratz,
which is an Israeli newspaper, says, as living space in
Gaza shrinks, remaining pockets endure hellish conditions, nearly two million
(32:43):
people crammed now into less than eighteen percent of Gaza.
This is all of course getting now much less attention
because now the world is focused on this war with Iran,
you know, the war. The Israeli initial strikes, of course,
done with our support, were launched at a time when
there was increasing public and global discontent with the continuation
(33:08):
of this genocide. Do you see those two things as
linked in terms of what led to this particular timing.
Speaker 13 (33:17):
Yes. I think that the Israelis have always understood that
the best chance for cleansing Gaza and the West Bank
was in the context of a big war. October seventh,
of course, provided the pretext for bombing Gaza and starting
the genocide. And there's no question in my mind that
(33:41):
the Israelis understood that if they started a war against Iran,
the focus would be on Iran, especially if they brought
the Americans in, and that would leave them free to
ramp up the genocide and possibly drive the Palestinians out
of Gaza. I mean, it's very clear that that is
their goal. And then the question you have to ask
(34:02):
yourself is, given that goal, what is the best way
for them to achieve that end? And it's quite clear
to me that starting a major war with Iran goes
a long way towards helping them cleanse gossip.
Speaker 3 (34:17):
So what do you think that how does this fit again?
You know, kind of returning to the global picture, we
could put the next one here up on the screen,
which is about this recently completed Iranian Chinese freight line.
Now nobody's claiming, you know, that this would be able
to replace the Straits of WARMUS. But if there is
a larger US military intervention, what will that lead to,
you know, in terms of US power that's able to
(34:39):
project in East Asia and elsewhere along with our reputation,
What is the logical conclusion that adversarial states would want
to make after further US involvement here in the Middle East.
Speaker 13 (34:52):
Well, look, there's no question that American policymakers believe that
the principal threat that the United States faces today is
from China. China is widely seen as a pure competitor,
and the United States has been interested in pivoting to
Asia since twenty eleven, when Hillary Clinton, who was then
(35:13):
Secretary of State, said We're going to pivot to Asia,
but we cannot pivot to Asia in any meaningful way,
in large part because of the Ukraine War and what's
going on in the Middle East. And if you look
at all the naval and air assets that we have
in the Middle East now that should be in East Asia,
you see that we have greatly weakened our strategic situation
(35:38):
in East Asia, and we are in a poor position
at this point in time for purposes of containing China.
This is not in our interest. And of course this
shows you what an albatross Israel is around our neck.
So there's no doubt that in terms of basic American
grand strategy, this is not good. And if you hypothesize
(36:03):
the situation where we're stuck in the Middle East for
months on end, this is an even worse situation. With
regard to our reputation. I think our reputation has been
badly damaged. I think there's no question about that, and
I think it will only get worse. And by the way,
one thing we haven't talked about is what the consequences
(36:24):
will be for Donald Trump on the home front. I mean,
Trump is betting that this is sort of a one
and done operation. We went in, we did the dirty work,
we solved the problem, and now we can celebrate, have
a victory parade or what have you. I don't think
this is the way this one's going to play out.
I don't think the Iranians are going to roll over
(36:46):
and play dead. I think we're probably going to have
to launch further operations against I Ran military operations that
is down the road, and there's no evidence that this
one is going to be settled quickly. And as I
said before, I think the Iranians, if anything, you're going
to get nuclear weapons and they're going to continue down
the nuclear road. And Trump is going to have egg
(37:07):
on his face. It's not going to be a great victory.
People are going to question why we did this, and
so I think he's going to have problems on the
home front as a result of all this.
Speaker 1 (37:17):
Totally agree, Professor.
Speaker 2 (37:19):
How do you separate out the influence of the Israel
lobby and the genuine ideological belief among many American elite
political leaders that endless support for Israel does directly serve
the interest of American empire. Like, for example, I think
Joe Biden was a very sincere, ideological Zionist who was
(37:41):
ideologically committed to supporting Israel come hell or high water.
How do you separate those two things out.
Speaker 13 (37:49):
Well, it is somewhat difficult to separate him out. But
the key point to remember is that any policymaker or
any politician or aspiring politician who criticizes Israel will find
out very quickly that that person has the lobby's gun
(38:11):
sights on him or her. The lobby will go to
great lengths to destroy that person's career and make sure
that he or she never gets elected to office. We'll
figure this out very quickly. And they also understand that
if you support Israel hook line and sinker, you'll get
big time support from the lobby, someone like Lindsey Graham
(38:34):
or Tom Cotton. They benefit enormously from making arguments that
the lobby finds in Israel's interest. If you're a general
in the American military and you're thinking about what you're
going to do after you retire, you understand full well
that if you criticize Israel, it'll be very hard to
find a job once you retire. And at the same time,
(38:58):
you understand that if you supp for it Israel, if
you back it and you push the American military to
do things that are said to be in Israel's interest,
your job prospects once you retire will be much better.
I could go on and on about this. Yeah, but
Israel lobby has enormous influence in the United States. There
(39:19):
is no case in the historical record that even comes
close to this every time.
Speaker 2 (39:25):
Do you think that grip is loosening at all? We
were just talking about the New York City mayoral race
Andrew Cuomo and Zoronman Donnie and he's been the supporter
of BDS, you know, calls it a genocide and Palestine
this is Zoran. And Andrew Cuomo is you know, very
much the APAC backed candidate, And I don't know who's
going to win, but he's certainly giving Cuomo run for
(39:46):
his money.
Speaker 7 (39:46):
You also have a number.
Speaker 2 (39:47):
Of vocal critics in Congress who have now survived that
APAC onslaught people like Rasheta Telei, people like on the
right Thomas Massey. So do you think that some of
that influence is beginning to crack in age well.
Speaker 13 (40:02):
Two points. One is that there's no question that the
lobby is in deep trouble and Israel is in deep trouble.
When you talk about the public at large, the word
is now out thanks to shows like yours and all
sorts of other alternative media sites. The fact is that
the word is out that Israel is committing a genocide,
(40:25):
that Israel is a strategic liability, that Israel drags us
into wars like this, and so forth and so on.
The problem is that the Israeli lobby or the Israel
lobby is still deadly effective at the policy level. They
have a lock on American policy makers, and people like
Thomas Massey and others are small in number. They're just
(40:47):
not many people at the policy level are willing to
contest the Israelis. So what has to happen here is
that the public opinion has to translate into a change
policy level. And I think the only place where that's
possible is in the Democratic Party. It doesn't look like
it's at all possible in the Republican Party. But if
(41:08):
you look at the polls and you look at how
young Democrats and this includes, by the way, many young
American Jews were deeply disaffected by what's happening here for
good moral and strategic reasons. But I think that's the hope.
Speaker 1 (41:23):
Yeah, you know, start on a personal level.
Speaker 3 (41:25):
You know, I read your book in two thousand and eight,
The Israel Lobby, huge influence, hugely influential. I read a
lot about realism and restraint, and I learned so much
from you just through your pages. Is it surreal to
watch the neo cons again get a victory.
Speaker 1 (41:39):
I didn't think it would happen.
Speaker 3 (41:41):
I know, I've seen the popularization of your work from
that time to today. We have this broad restraint community,
and I feel like it's all completely failed. You know,
just to watch it all happen again, to see Lindsey Graham,
to see Fox News Mark Levin, What is it like
for you, having lived through this twice now, to watch
the you know, the war drums beat the same people
(42:01):
who are wrong previously get to claim a victory.
Speaker 1 (42:04):
Lab It just seems so surreal to me.
Speaker 13 (42:06):
It does seem surreal. I mean, sometimes, as you would expect,
I'm guilty of wishful thinking, and I want to believe
that the lobby's power will be curved, and we will
do the right thing, both strategically and morally. But it happens,
it turns out very quickly that that is wishful thinking,
(42:27):
and you realize that the lobby is as powerful as ever.
And this is all to say that I think, moving
forward over the next couple months and even over the
next couple of years, the lobby will have a lock
on American policy and they will push us to do
things in the Middle East that are not in our interest.
I don't see Donald Trump contesting the lobby in any
(42:51):
meaningful way. He's a guy who likes to talk tough,
but ultimately he's not very tough. And when it comes
to Israel, just look at what he did in his
first term and what he's done since taking office in
his second term, and there is no reason to think
that he's going to contest Israel in any meaningful way.
Speaker 2 (43:11):
Professor, My last question for you here is under the
Obama administration that Israel lobby did take one significant blow,
which was the successful negotiation of the JCPO way.
Speaker 7 (43:21):
What do you think that created the conditions.
Speaker 2 (43:23):
That made that deal possible? Even though you know Bby
at now who came here and preached to Congress.
Speaker 7 (43:29):
You had a.
Speaker 2 (43:30):
Robust debate, a huge propaganda effort to try to kill
that deal, and it was able to ultimately go through.
So what do you think created that possibility?
Speaker 13 (43:39):
Well, I think that Obama fully understood that the lobby
was powerful, but nevertheless its policies were not good for
the United States. I think he understood that Israel is
an albatross around their neck. He would never say that publicly,
(43:59):
but I'll I'm fully confident that he understood that, and
he understood that getting a deal with Iran made sense,
and he worked over time to fashion a deal. And
he had the benefit that he had a number of
European countries, the French, the British, and the Germans, plus
the Russians, plus the Chinese on his side, and he
(44:21):
was able to barely push through the JCPOA, the nuclear
agreement with Iran. He took tremendous heat along the way
from the Israelis and from the lobby. And then when
Trump came to power in twenty seventeen January twenty seventeen,
he made it clear that he was going to do
(44:42):
away with the JCPOA, and of course in twenty eighteen,
the summer of twenty eighteen, he walked away from it.
And then you want to remember that when we started,
when we started dealing with this issue again, when the
Trump administration started dealing with this issue again a few
months ago, Steve Whitcoff and Trump himself, we're talking about
(45:05):
working out a deal that looked like the JCPOA. The
lobby then moved in, unsurprisingly, and the lobby made it
clear to Whitcoff and to Trump that there was not
going to be a deal like the JCPOA, and Witcoff
and Trump both did one hundred and eighty degree turns,
said the Iranians cannot have any nuclear enrichment at all,
(45:27):
which was allowed in the original JCPOA, and the Iranians
said that was unacceptable. And here we are today. So
what is the bottom line. The bottom line is that
common sense won a victory during the Obama period, but
that was quickly overturned. That victory was quickly overturned by Trump.
(45:51):
And then it looked like Trump might win a victory
for common sense this time, and it was quickly returned
by the lobby. So you see the power of the
lobby at every turn, it's almost impossible for a president
to have any maneuver room when it comes to dealing
with issues that are dear to israel Is hard.
Speaker 3 (46:12):
There you go, well, sir, thank you very much for
joining us. We always appreciate your voice and hope to
see you again soon.
Speaker 7 (46:17):
Thank you very thank you, professor, you're welcome.
Speaker 3 (46:20):
Thank you guys so much for watching. We really appreciate it.
We're go a great show for you tomorrow.
Speaker 1 (46:24):
We'll see them
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Cold Case Files: Miami
Joyce Sapp, 76; Bryan Herrera, 16; and Laurance Webb, 32—three Miami residents whose lives were stolen in brutal, unsolved homicides.  Cold Case Files: Miami follows award‑winning radio host and City of Miami Police reserve officer  Enrique Santos as he partners with the department’s Cold Case Homicide Unit, determined family members, and the advocates who spend their lives fighting for justice for the victims who can no longer fight for themselves.