Breaking down our 'Critiquing Mass Media' classroom session on how quickly and completely Margaret Brennan folded as Face the Nation host in trying to call out Secretary of State Marco Rubio on intelligence reports showing whether or not the supreme leader of Iran directly ordered the weaponization of the country's nuclear reserves.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) is a solid, principled dude. Ryan likes and admires him. But is the Congressman going too far in his opposition to President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' and military strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities?
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) is a solid, principled dude. Ryan likes and admires him. But is the Congressman going too far in his opposition to President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' and military strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities?
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Well, let me say this unequivocally.
Speaker 2 (00:01):
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 seeing 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 to do. I thought somebody
(00:23):
should do it for a long time. But better late
than never.
Speaker 1 (00:26):
Okay. I always get a little nervous when I agree
with John Bolton on anything, but there it was. Back
here on Ryan Shirley Live. Your text five seven seven
three nine, your thoughts on the ongoing military volleys that
we're seeing in that region. Just today, if you're just
tuning in, Iran has fired missiles toward an American based
(00:47):
in Qatar. They were all but one intercepted, and President Trump,
to his credit, gave a full detailed report of exactly
what happened as he saw it, and he basically brushed
these aside and said, Iran, let us know in advance.
We thank them for doing it. It's time for peace. Congratulations, world,
Now it's time for peace. That's an actual post on
(01:07):
true social never a dull moment, and there is a
moment here to appreciate what President Trump has done. The magnitude,
the gravity of this, but the effectiveness of it, and
how a military action like this has targeted and precise
and successful that it was, can help us avoid further conflict,
(01:28):
can help us avoid a nuclear Iran, can put them
back in their box where they belong. Peace through strength,
that means both of those things.
Speaker 3 (01:38):
I had all these libs coming at me in Atoll.
I thought you were anti war RAI. It was, oh,
come on, aren't you going to condemn? This is not
America first? It's America first. It's America primarily because it
serves our national interests. Having a denuclearized Iran always was
in our international interest, no matter what President Obama tried
(01:59):
to sh shoehorn in with some kind of deal with
the country that you cannot bargain with, cannot negotiate with,
cannot reason with. This is a militant, extremist, radical regime.
What are you hoping to extract from them?
Speaker 1 (02:15):
Exactly? If you give them palettess of cash, if you
unfreeze their bank accounts, if you give them the green
light to develop nuclear power, of course they're going to
abuse it, and that's what happened. And don't take my
word for it. Don't even take President Trump's word for it,
although he's seen the Intel reports and I believe his
interpretation of them. But the IAEA point blank said heron's
(02:37):
not holding up there into the bargain here, they're over
enriching these amounts of uranium that can be weaponized once
they reach ninety percent. They're at like sixty percent. There's
no reason to have sixty percent enriched uranium if you're
using it for no other purpose than nuclear power, which
we all know was foolishness to believe in the first place.
(02:58):
That's not what they were doing, sitting on some of
the richest oil reserves in the world and without any
kind of motivation to go green. That's not who they are,
that's not what they're about. It's not a leftist regime.
It's an authoritarian, extremist Islamo fascist regime. They're not gonna
want to enter into the green New Deal of Iran.
(03:21):
Anybody believes that, I'm sorry, is point blank just moronic.
That's what that is. So not real comfortable with John Bolton.
The nation building thing makes me cringe. You know, regime change. No, No,
it's not up to us to do that. Now we
can unseat the current regime, and that presents a problem.
There there is no option here that's a perfect threading
(03:44):
in the needle of if we just do this, and
it'll be you know, rainbows and unicorns for all the
rest of time, and Iran will be peaceful, and you know,
the greatest is liberators like we were told with Iraq,
and there'd be a democratic Iran that there might not be,
And there is an uncertainty here that will follow that
we won't have any power to do anything about, nor
(04:05):
should we, because the more Americans try to have influence
in this, and I'm talking about American leaders like Trump,
like the military, the more the Iranian people are going
to resist it. They don't want to have any kind
of power structure leadership installed and impressed upon them. And
I've also followed various Iranian resistance accounts. They've reached out
(04:27):
to me directly and personally. I'm not sure why. They
just maybe they like the cut of my jib. I
don't know, because I'm not Iranian. I don't have any
personal affiliation to any of them other than yeah, I'd
like to see the current Iranian regime fall, but what
replaces it. They don't want the sha back, raise a Pavlavi,
they don't want that monarchy back. But what do they want?
(04:48):
They've never been asked because they're living under the thumb
of the Ayahtola, and if they do say what they want,
they'll be hanged or shot, or be headed or stoned
or maybe all the above, burned alive be another one,
Joan of Arc. So John Bolton, he's getting a little
too excited, little too excited. I thought this was a measured, military,
(05:09):
precise strike by the president. It was warranted, it was justified,
it was a long time coming. I agree with all
of that. But this should be a means to an end,
and I mean an end, an end to a nuclear Iran.
Is that what we're getting here? The part that I
feel better about when I feel kind of uneasy about
aligning with what anything? John Bolton says, I call him
(05:30):
the lowrus. He's got a mustache and everywhere we go
he wants war. Putin's oh that guy, he wants war.
And Trump's not a big fan of his. And for
good reason, because Bolton is this you know, old school
throwback bush chainey, neo kN war hawk. I'm not about
any of that. I know a lot of you aren't either.
(05:51):
We're tired of that. I am tired of being lied to,
and I don't like the rhetoric being ratcheted up about
regime change and now though, I mean that's the question
that Thomas Massey's asking in others like, well, we've known
about this Iranian threat for over forty five years. They've
killed Americans, we've known that they've pursued nuclear that, we've
(06:11):
known that. What changed now? And I think that we
are owed as a public, as American voters, is Trump supporters,
as just American citizens who don't like Trump, any of
us are owed in explanation at some point as to
what happened here. But let's look under the hood. What
are we doing here? Why do we do this? And
I believe that President Trump will do that in due time,
(06:32):
But you don't do that right out front. Go Okay,
here's what we're doing, and here's why we're doing it,
and here's exactly when we're doing it. I mean, Donald
Trump made fun of a reporter asking him that like
a week ago, Like I'm gonna tell you, well, I'm
gonna tell his when Yeah, you want to go there
and watch. Okay now, but I do feel good that
John Brennan, who's as corruptive an official as there is
(06:53):
a former in the administration. This man should be prosecuted,
says that Trump somehow put us in this position because
he backed out of the Iran nuclear deal.
Speaker 4 (07:02):
It is come on, do you think we'd be in
this position now if the US had not pulled out
of the Iran nuclear deal in the first Trump administration?
Speaker 5 (07:10):
Absolutely not, because the Bordeaux was prohibited from enriching uranium
until twenty thirty, and so Trump's decision to tear up
that agreement and to abandon it the Iranian's wordhering to it, the.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
United States was not.
Speaker 5 (07:24):
So I think the United States has had a chance
to prevent this from happening, but unfortunately, I think the
Trump administration has decided to go forward with bb netyahu's
plans to do as much damage as possible inside of
Iran and so toward regime change.
Speaker 1 (07:41):
Do you really believe do you honestly believe that Iran
was adhering to their end of the deal when it
came to the nuclear arrangement that was made between President
Obama and Iran or Joe Biden who reignited that this part.
Speaker 5 (07:54):
Bordeaux was prohibited from enriching uranium until twenty.
Speaker 1 (07:59):
Thirty that did not happen. We have direct evidence refuting
that by the IAEA that they were in fact enriching
uranium to high percentages sixty percent, with the ultimate goal
of making a nuclear weapon. That's the only purpose that
that level of enriched uranium would be used for. Brennan,
(08:19):
is I mean out of his depth? Is to put
it mildly. But let's go back to the Marco Rubio
exchange with Margaret Brennan, And in case you missed it,
notice we're going to do the whole critiquing mass media
class room session here where she begins in her line
of questioning from this very adamant, self assured, confident place
(08:43):
of I know what these intelligence reports say, and so
do you. And don't they say this, mister secretary? And
aren't you saying that the Ayatola did not directly order
the enrichment and weaponization of uranium. Isn't that what was
in the reports? Q? Marco Rubio, who says no, that's
not what was in the reports.
Speaker 4 (09:04):
Are you saying there that the United States did not
see intelligence that the Supreme Leader had ordered weaponization or
that's irrelevant.
Speaker 6 (09:13):
I think that question being asked on the media, that's
an irrelevant question.
Speaker 4 (09:16):
They had met in US intelligence assessment. You know it's not,
yes it was.
Speaker 6 (09:22):
I know that better than you know that, and I
know that that's not the case.
Speaker 1 (09:25):
But whether the order was given.
Speaker 6 (09:27):
And the people will say that it doesn't matter the
order was given. They have everything they need to build
nuclear weapons.
Speaker 1 (09:33):
He's exactly right. She's exactly wrong for her to suggest
that it was whoever ordered the code read and that's
why Santiago got it. No, whether the ayah Tola was
in on the decision making or not, he probably has
a level of plausible deniability. They want to insulate him
from those decisions. Don't ask, don't tell. So various military
(09:53):
leaders in coalition, with a lot of these so called scientists, physicists,
those developing the nuclear energy and technology on behalf of
the regime, who were also eliminated. I might add, they
knew how to enrich this uranium. They didn't need permission
from the Ayatola. They didn't need an order directly from
(10:16):
the Supreme leader of Iran. And again to my earlier point,
they would make all the sense in the world that
they would eliminate remove the Iyatola from that decision so
that he could not be blamed for it, but would
ostensibly sign off on it with a wink and a nod.
Just don't let me know what you're dead, that sort
of thing. Riuvio continues to press back on this from
(10:37):
Margaret Brennan, and notice how she withers in his presence
as he just flattens her.
Speaker 6 (10:42):
Why would you bury things in a mountain three hundred
feet under the ground. Why would you bury six Why
did they have sixty percent in enrich uranium? You don't
need sixty percent in rich area. The only countries in
the world that have uranium at sixty percent are countries
that have nuclear weapons, because it can quickly make it
ninety They.
Speaker 7 (10:57):
Have all the elements they have.
Speaker 6 (10:58):
Why do they have a space par again, is Aron
going to go to the moon?
Speaker 7 (11:01):
No, they're trying to build an ICBM.
Speaker 4 (11:03):
But that's.
Speaker 1 (11:07):
Iran will only go to the moon if we put
them there. And you know what I mean. And this
is where She gets very haughty about what the intelligence
says and how these reports are used, and just like,
what are you talking about.
Speaker 4 (11:21):
That's a question of intent. And you know in the
intelligence assessment that it was that Iran wanted to be
a threshold.
Speaker 7 (11:27):
See you use those levers.
Speaker 4 (11:28):
I'm talking on what the intelligence March assessment. And that's
why I was asking you if you know something more from.
Speaker 6 (11:34):
That's an inaccurate representation of it. That's an accurate representation
of it. That's not how intelligence is read, that's not
how intelligence is used.
Speaker 7 (11:42):
Here's what the whole world knows.
Speaker 6 (11:43):
Forget about intelligence, what the IAEA knows. They are enriching
uranium well beyond anything you need for a for a
for a civil nuclear program.
Speaker 7 (11:53):
So why would you enrich uranium.
Speaker 6 (11:55):
At sixty percent right if you don't intend to one
day use it to take it to ninety and build
a weapon. Why why are you developing icvms? Why do
you have eight thousand short range missiles in two to
three thousand long mid range missiles that you continue to develop?
Speaker 7 (12:08):
Why do you do all these things?
Speaker 1 (12:10):
Failed questions and even Mary Brennet at this point, yeah,
well yeah, yeah, no, you're right, okay, okay, And then
she finishes in this position, remember where she started, and
then witness where she finishes here, where she backs down
to a certain square, much less sure of herself.
Speaker 6 (12:27):
I have to everything they need for a nuclear weapon.
They have the delivery mechanisms, they have the enrichment capability,
they have the highly.
Speaker 7 (12:33):
Enriched uranium that is stored. That's all we need to see.
Speaker 8 (12:36):
Right.
Speaker 6 (12:36):
Well, now she has a regime that's already involved in
terrorism and proxies and all kinds of things are on.
There are the source of all and no one's disputing.
Speaker 4 (12:44):
No one's disputing that. I'm not doing that here. And
they were censured at the IAEA for that enrichment and
for violating their non proliferation agreements. I was simply asking
if we had intelligence.
Speaker 1 (12:54):
No, you weren't that there was an order to.
Speaker 4 (12:56):
Weaponize, because you said weaponization.
Speaker 6 (12:58):
Ambitions wentagics weren't think they need to build a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 7 (13:02):
And that's more than enough.
Speaker 1 (13:03):
Yeah, she's stuck on this talking point of did the
Ayatolla the Supreme Leader authorized the weaponization of the nuclear
uh program. He didn't need to. And that was the
point that Rubio was making there It is irrelevant. Iran
had the motive, certainly to develop a nuclear weapon for
(13:25):
the region and to enhance their power within it. They
had the means because Obama and Biden green lighted them.
And of course they're going to push the margins, cheat
and do things under the cover of darkness with the
IAEA only occasionally coming in and what were they going
to do? Write a strongly worded letter like Team America
World Police with Hans Blicks almost going to be the
(13:46):
consequence of Iran continuing to flout the IAEA and the
levels of enrichment that they were supposed to stay with,
and they weren't doing it. They weren't coloring within the
lines because they knew they didn't have to because Obama
and baia I would not hold them accountable. There was
no motive for them to adhere to any deal. There
was every opportunity and motive to violate the deal, to
(14:11):
push the margins, to test the boundaries, just like a
little kid that sees what they can get away with.
Vice President j. D. Vance, also on the Sunday talk
shows Circuit and pushing back on the Iran foreign ministers,
saying that the US with these bombings well, they did it.
They've blown up diplomacy. It's over. Well, let's talk.
Speaker 9 (14:32):
About the possibility of negotiations. I mean, the Iranian foreign
minister were responded to the strikes this morning saying, Israel
and the US have quote blown up diplomacy. Mister Vice President,
is there any real hope for diplomacy or is diplomacy
dead at this point?
Speaker 10 (14:49):
Well, I think the foreign minister is exactly wrong. We
didn't blow up diplomacy. We only took this action, Kristen,
when it was clear, as the President said, that the
Iranians were tapping us along.
Speaker 1 (14:59):
I think it's important for the American.
Speaker 10 (15:00):
People to appreciate here that if you go back to
March of this year, we had the entire administration engaged
in this diplomatic effort, and frankly, in March of this year,
we had some optimism. How do we get from there
to now? And the answer is we felt very strongly
that the Iranians were stonewalling us. They weren't taking this seriously.
They were trying to draw this process out as long
(15:22):
as possible so that they could rebuild their nuclear weapons
program without the threat of American action.
Speaker 1 (15:28):
They had many opportunities the Iranians to sit down in
talks negotiations with President Trump. That's what he wanted, That's
what he kept clamoring for, both behind closed doors, private
phone conversations, public comments that he was making and directing
at the Iranian regime. He even spoke about a two
week window. You heard this last week now. I ended
up launching these strikes two days in because of what
(15:51):
Vice President Vance just said that it really did appear
that Iran had no interest in trying to reach any
kind of compromise or have any kind of talks along
those lines. And this very saint Iran foreign minister said
that they had no interest in having those conversations with
the United States, especially after the Israeli strikes had begun.
Speaker 10 (16:09):
We had a limited window in which we could take
out this four DOAU nuclear facility, in particular, the President
decided to take it. But we didn't blow up the diplomacy.
The diplomacy never was given a real chance by the Iranians.
And our hope, Kristen, as the President said repeatedly, is
that this maybe can reset here. The Iranians have a choice.
(16:29):
They can go down the path of peace or they
can go down the path of this ridiculous brinksmanship, of
funding terrorism, of trying to build a nuclear weapon, and
that's just not something the United States can accept.
Speaker 1 (16:42):
They can't, we cannot accept that Iran has now been
delivered that message. But it's in the language, the only
language they truly understand in Iran and for the most
part that region, which is a brute force show of strength.
That is what happened on Saturday night. And JD. Vance
then takes the opportunity with Christian Welker this from Meet
the Press, speak directly to the Iranian leadership, and he
(17:05):
spikes the football here.
Speaker 10 (17:07):
I want to say something, Christen, just to the Iranian leadership. Look,
they have tried to build a nuclear weapons program.
Speaker 1 (17:14):
That program is now destroyed.
Speaker 10 (17:15):
They tried to build a conventional missile program to attack
neighbors in the region. That missile program has shown to
be a failure. They have funded terrorism aggressively in the region,
and now most of their terrorism proxies are destroyed. The
Iranians are clearly not very good at war. Perhaps they
should follow President Trump's lead and give piece a chance.
(17:36):
If they're serious about it. I guarantee you the president
of the United States is too.
Speaker 1 (17:40):
What President Trump has in abundance here that I think
is far more effective than his first term. All due
respect to Mike Pence, and I say that as strongly
as I can state it is he has now derivative voices,
and the Vice President JD. Vans, the Secretary of State
Marco Rubio, and I would even fold in Secretary of
(18:01):
Defense Pete Hegsett that speak with one mind and one voice,
and one mission and one set of priorities. And they
are effective stewards of the America first message of trump Ism,
and they are setting themselves up, each of them, to
be formidable candidates in twenty twenty eight. Think about how
they are shining, both Marco Rubio and JD. Vance in
(18:24):
these environments with hostile media, making these points, doing so effectively,
and doing so on behalf of the Trump administration. It's
going to be an interesting race heading into twenty twenty eight.
But in the here and now, this was a successful
military endeavor and we hope it builds a lasting piece.
(18:47):
All right, in the midst of solidifying my investments with
Trajan Wealth, yes, I'm giving you a first hand account,
and I can advise that you do the same that
you get all of your investments heading in the same
direction and on the same page. And I feel so
much better about where I'm going from here because I
did just that. And I sat down with Andy Justice
and the folks at Trajan Wealth not once, but twice.
(19:08):
There could be more meetings in the future, and I
can definitely communicate with them whenever I need them. They
are accessible, and they got back to me with an email.
I just sent today this one from Ryan Pursley about
investing another dollar amount in my IRA that I have
set up. It's kind of a base level thing. I'm
hoping to move into stocks at some point with a
higher level investment. But first things first, and Rome wasn't
(19:28):
built in a day and all that kind of stuff.
And you can determine where you are. You might be
further along than I am, and I hope that you are,
and you can ascertain that in a phone call at
seven two oh four zero five thirty three hundred. You
can also set up a free one on one consultation
so that they can direct you to a plan that's
uniquely suited and tailored to your needs and your level
(19:50):
of risk tolerance. Seven two oh four zero five thirty
three hundred with locations in Broomfield, Greenwood Village and Loveland.
You can also find out more online at trajan Wealth
dot com. That's Trajanwealth dot com. Tradean Wealth, a proud
sponsor of Ryan Schuling Live advisory service is offered through
Trajan Wealth LLC and SEC Registered Investment Advisor. Paid advertisement.
Speaker 7 (20:15):
To La.
Speaker 1 (20:21):
Calda. I always think of Fred Willard and Catherine O'Hara
from Waiting for Guffman and the sketch that they do
for Corky played by Christopher Cast. Have you seen that
movie Shannon, Oh Dude, you gotta Oh my goodness, Waiting
for Guffman, Best in Show and a Mighty Wind. It
was like a trilogy. The one had nothing to do
(20:43):
with the other two, but it was the same troop
of actors and the three that I mentioned. Michael McKeon
is in a couple of them as well. A Cast
one thousand, Parker Posey names off the top of my head.
This is late nineties, early two thousands. All three movies
are fantastic, but Waiting for Gufman was the original, with
Fred Willard and Captain O'Hara doing a sketch of this song,
(21:05):
singing it and singing it quite well. She's a good singer.
I got a lot of news to pass along here
and I will do that Ian just a moment. But
Representative Thomas Massey, he went on with Tim Poole on
Tim's podcast. I've been trying to get Representative Massey to
come on this program. I have direct contact with his people,
and I'd like to have a conversation with it, because
(21:25):
I always preface it this way. I am a big
fan of being sassy with Massey. Sometimes he gets sassine.
You don't know what he's gonna do, you don't know
which way he's gonna go. But he's his own person.
It's all the same praise I give, let's say, Senator
John Fetterman, which I know to the depths of my
soul that neither Fetterman or Massey can be bought. They
(21:47):
are their own men. They think for themselves. They don't,
you know, here to focus groups or donors. They do
what they think is right, and I'm not going to
agree with them. A lot of the time. I agree
with Massey a lot more often then I agree with
save Fetterman. But I respect both men. And here's what
Representative mass He had to say about Trump going after
(22:08):
him on truth social.
Speaker 11 (22:10):
It's amazing that the president of the United States, the
guy who launched seven B two bombers to the other
side of the planet to bomb targets over there and
returned them, he got up and spent fifteen minutes writing
a tweet about a Republican, not a Democrat, a Republican.
Speaker 1 (22:29):
Congressman from Kentucky.
Speaker 11 (22:31):
I responded to that tweet, actually quoted it, and I
just said, you know, President Trump's declared so much war
on me in the last day that it should require
an Act of Congress at this point.
Speaker 1 (22:45):
And he's not inaccurate on this because here's the post
from seven hours ago. Trump retruthing himself on a post
from yesterday. Get this bum out of office asap, and
he has bumming quotes for some the things. There's so
many things I love about President Trump's true social posts
boson x, the random capitalization that's one of my favorites,
(23:08):
and the random scare quotes around certain words. Get this
so called bum in quotes out of office asap, and
he says Congressman Thomas Massey of Kentucky is not Maga,
even though he likes to say he is. Actually Maga,
doesn't want him, doesn't know him, and doesn't respect him.
(23:32):
He's a negative force who almost always votes know no
matter how good something may be. He's a simple minded
grandstander who thinks it's good politics for Ron to have
the highest level nuclear weapon while at the same time
yelling death to America at every chance they get. So
(23:53):
there's talk about primary ying. If that's a word, I
just made it up Thomas Massey, and I just I
don't see the lane for victory here in Massey makes
that case here, and he makes it well, you.
Speaker 11 (24:06):
Can't run to the right of me in Kentucky.
Speaker 1 (24:08):
There is no room to the right of me.
Speaker 11 (24:11):
So for three primaries in a row, people have tried
running to the Trump of me.
Speaker 7 (24:15):
They say I'm not Trump enough.
Speaker 11 (24:17):
But the reality is, when you dig down into it,
I'm the original.
Speaker 1 (24:20):
America first congressman.
Speaker 11 (24:22):
That has always been my platform, even when it costs
me in popularity. And so over twelve years, I've developed
that understanding with my constituents.
Speaker 1 (24:33):
And I think that's a key distinction. And his Brownie
office says a distinction with a difference this one has
that difference. Is he maga? Does he make America great again?
Is he's sporting the red hat? Is he going to
Trump rallies? No? No, Thomas Massey's not that guy. Is
the America first he is, and he's he's what I
(24:54):
would call in many instances, and I think this is
where Tucker Carlston has migrated to and I'm not there
America only. Well, here's the simple reality of the matter.
We cannot exist in a vacuum. We do exist in
the context of the world stage where not the world's policemen.
I don't want us to be. We shouldn't be entangled
(25:15):
in foreign wars of mis and venture. I don't want
us to be. But to divorce us from any responsibility,
any kind of leadership role on the global stage is
it's just not possible. We could do it, but we
would do so much to our own detriment. We have
to exist in a world around us that includes nations
(25:38):
of allies and adversaries, and you have to deal with
the real Would I prefer that we could just go
about our business and be Americans and do American things
and only care about America. That sounds nice, but again,
it's not realistic. And I think Massy fits into a
category certainly of Congress members that are America only. In
a lot of cases, I think we should be America first.
(26:00):
We should not go around engaging in military expeditions. Let's say, like, oh,
I don't know, Vietnam that is based on a theory
that is based on a theory, a domino theory that
a Vietnam falls, all the other countries in the Far East,
the Philippines, Japan, They're all going to fall to communism.
Did that happen? It did not happen. So it was
(26:20):
a flawed theory. It's a failed theory, and many young
American servicemen died in the name of that theory to
help bail out the French again again and try to
salvage something in South Vietnam that resembled a democracy. Is
that worth American lives? No? No, it was not, It
(26:42):
is not, it won't ever be. So I'm on board
with a lot of where Representative Massey's head is at,
but he goes a little little far off that end
of America first, where I just think it's not in
our best interest to only think of our interest exclude
that they're not intertwined with anybody else for any other reason.
(27:04):
We do have a national interest in the survival of
Israel in the Middle East. I would say that to
what degree that's the debatable part. And I will acknowledge that.
Here's the math that Thomas Massey is citing and the
type of candidate that he thinks the Trump Maga PAK
might try to run against him. It's going to be
a hell of a fight.
Speaker 11 (27:25):
I mean, I've never got less than seventy five percent
in any of my primaries.
Speaker 1 (27:29):
I'm not saying that's going to be the case this time.
Speaker 11 (27:31):
I'll probably have millions and millions.
Speaker 1 (27:33):
Of dollars spent against me.
Speaker 11 (27:34):
They still haven't found a candidate yet who wants to
try this, and trust me, they're searching hard in my district. Eventually,
they'll find some schmuck to be in the TV commercials
who has no record whatsoever, and they'll try to make
him out to be the next Ronald Reagan or something true.
Speaker 1 (27:53):
Now ask yourself this question too, Would you rather the
Republican Party under the leadership of Donald Trump, or any
special interest pack that you might support or donate to.
Would you rather they target somebody like Thomas Massey, who
is with the Republican Party on a vast majority of issues,
waste that time, effort, money ads in trying to unseat
(28:15):
Massy or in going after these purple seats and flipping
them red. Now, I know a lot of you're saying, well,
what if we just get like a rhino in there? Now,
I understand that Thomas Massey's not a rhino. That term's
been overused and it does not extend to him. That's
not what I would categorize Representative Massey as. But he
can become a whipping boy. And I love this analogy
(28:35):
that he uses. This is kind of Kentucky coming out
in in my dad is why is Donald Trump so
focused on him? Him in particular him specifically.
Speaker 11 (28:43):
He's coming after me to show the other Republicans in Congress. Hey,
that horse got out of the barn, and we're whipping
that horse as hard as we can. You can't withstand
that kind of whipping, You better stay in the barn.
And I've had interactions with President Trump going all the
way back to twenty twenty, some of them being cordial,
(29:03):
some of them been adversarial. What he does know is
I'm not changing my mind on this stuff.
Speaker 1 (29:10):
He's not. He's talking in this case about the big
beautiful bill, and he's not changing his mind. I don't
think on Iran, and that's fine. We don't have to
be a monolith here. And I might disagree with Congressman Massy,
but he represents a district in Kentucky that fervently supports him.
So in order to unseat him, are you going to
come up with a candidate who's more popular than Massy
(29:30):
that can get more of the vote in a primary.
I just don't see that as being a realistic objective.
And this is just Donald Trump, I think, overreacting in
an emotional way to a guy that he just can't
keep in line. Like you said, he's the horse that
got out of the barn. I think that's an apt description,
and that Massey owns that and wears that actually rather proudly.
(29:50):
So you know, there's not going to be a lot
of convincing him. It's tough because it's a narrowly divided House.
And if the bill comes back and has got some
Senate revisions to it, which may include taking away the
salt exemptions for New York and California based on state taxes. Well,
now you've got the contingent of Republicans that are from
California and New York. That might mean no longer support
(30:12):
the bill. But now Thomas Massey comes along, well now
I will support it. And this could get really messy
between now and July fourth, which is when we were
told that the Senate was going to have their version
to send back over to the House. Are you sassy
with Massy or do you think he's just kind of
making political theater out of this. I want to get
your thoughts at five, seven, seven, three nine, and we'll
(30:34):
close out with those and much more after this on
Ryan Schuling Live. I just remember the Fred Armison sketch
on Saturday Night Live where he's playing moon, I'm a
Demi Jod, I'm a Dinna jod, that's it yep, And
it was this song. Who was set to this song?
I ran so far away and yet our B two
(30:56):
bombers can reach it. Ryan Schiling Live wrap up on
this Monday edition dedicated to the ever breaking news over
the weekend and then including today in case you're just
tuning in just getting out of work. Dan capls will
be next. I'm sure he'll be talking about this at length.
Iran lobbed what was it, fourteen missiles toured an American
base in Qatar, but apparently gave warning, gave a heads
(31:20):
up to not only Katar, but the United States, is
what President Trump is claiming. Thirteen of the fourteen missiles
were intercepted, and the fourteenth fell harmlessly, I think, into
the sea. It was just say we let it go.
It died a blaze of a life. And this on
CNN's head. There's is good news coming in left and right.
This from Jeff Zeleny's CNN oil drops, meaning the price
(31:44):
of oil stocks rise after Iran's intercepted strike on US base.
That's just today. So that's good news on both those
fronts for President Trump. More good news for the Trump
administration the Supreme Court ruling six' three Allowing President trump
to con continued deporting criminal aliens to third party. Countries
this just, in And i'll give you one guess as
(32:05):
to who the three dissenting justices. Were remember When Ruth Bader,
Ginsburg may she rest in, peace passed away and, There
oh she'll always be known for her scathing. Descents those, Descents,
oh they're going to live in the historical annals of
time and they'll be referred back to those. Descents, WELL
i mean, maybe but it's to. MEMORIALIZE i guess a
(32:26):
justice disagreeing with a vert a ruling by the higher.
Court but it's the losing. Side so Is Sonya Soda
mayor penned a scathing. Descent it's always a scathing descent
and was joined by fellow Liberals Elena kagan And Kintanji Brown,
jackson who just criticized her fellow conservative members from their
(32:46):
two textual they're textualists and their interpretation of The. Constitute,
yeah that's why they were appointed. There they're. Originalists that's
how they viewed The. Constitution and if it's going to be,
changed here's how you do. It, Uh congress amends. It
The Supreme court doesn't do it by, fiat at least
it shouldn't by having superpowers above and beyond that Of
(33:08):
congress or The. Presidency these are three co equal, branches
The judiciary and The Supreme court of The United. States
their job is to interpret The, constitution interpret the. Laws that's,
it not make. Law but that's HOW kbj would have.
Speaker 5 (33:22):
It.
Speaker 1 (33:23):
Anyway The Supreme court allowing The trump administration to restart
swift removals of migrants to countries other than their, homelands
lifting for now a court order requiring they get a
chance to challenge the. Deportation this is from The New York.
Post The High court's action came After District Judge Brian
murphy In boston shocker found the administration that violated his
(33:45):
order by sending eight people To South sudan In. May
who the hell died and Made Brian murphy king poohbab
of everything legal In. America that's WHAT i don't.
Speaker 8 (33:55):
Get the, gull the, audacity the balls of these judges
in district courts throughout the, country liberal ones, here they're
Everywhere San, FRANCISCO, Dc, boston wherever that they could just
rise up.
Speaker 1 (34:08):
And based on their own. Opinion they're not elected by,
anybody by the, way they're appointed political appointees that they
supersede The Chief executive of The United, states The commander
in chief of The United, states the duly Elected president
of The United states who won the Electoral. College, no
this is where Just Chief Justice roberts needs to step
(34:29):
in and they have to put their foot down on.
This once and for. All we cannot have. This AND
i would say it if there were a democratic president
and some podent judges from rural red states kept popping,
up and you can't do. That you can't do, that
you can't do. That we can't have a president cannot effectively.
Govern then a president must be free to make bad
decisions in some, cases and he will be judged by the,
(34:49):
people and he will suffer the consequences of the ballot
box in the next. Election by any every two, years
let's get some text five, seven seven thirty. Nine so
painful to listen to these idiot news. Shows kristin And
margaret think they're so. Smart, Yeah Kristin welker For meet
The press And Margaret brennan From face The. Nation AND
i think both Jad vance And Marco rubio handle themselves
(35:10):
with a, plumb respectively in that. Order, RYAN i think
this latest foreign policy By trump shows us that if
he was re elected in twenty, twenty those Thirteen marines
would still be. Alive Joe biden In afghanistan withdrawal was
a clown. Show, YES i, agree one hundred. Percent and
even if if the worst case scenario had, Happened President
trump would not have been looking at his. Watch we
(35:32):
still have that that photo in the control room That
i'm pointing at right now in The Kahouse, Studios biden
with a stupid mask ON covid times looking at his.
Watch when DO i get out of? Here when the
bodies of Those marines arrived back On american? Soil, disgraceful
absolutely one hundred, percent, Patty patty chiming. In Has biden
given a statement yet or are they still trying to
(35:53):
explain him the difference on the military strike In iran
and the volcanic eruption To? Hawaii, PATTY i still don't
think he knows what happened In hawaii at. All that'll
do it for me for. Now stay tuned The Dan
caplis show us. Next i'll be back with you On
tuesday with More Ryan Schuling live
Well, let me say this unequivocally.
Speaker 2 (00:01):
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 seeing 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 to do. I thought somebody
(00:23):
should do it for a long time. But better late
than never.
Speaker 1 (00:26):
Okay. I always get a little nervous when I agree
with John Bolton on anything, but there it was. Back
here on Ryan Shirley Live. Your text five seven seven
three nine, your thoughts on the ongoing military volleys that
we're seeing in that region. Just today, if you're just
tuning in, Iran has fired missiles toward an American based
(00:47):
in Qatar. They were all but one intercepted, and President Trump,
to his credit, gave a full detailed report of exactly
what happened as he saw it, and he basically brushed
these aside and said, Iran, let us know in advance.
We thank them for doing it. It's time for peace. Congratulations, world,
Now it's time for peace. That's an actual post on
(01:07):
true social never a dull moment, and there is a
moment here to appreciate what President Trump has done. The magnitude,
the gravity of this, but the effectiveness of it, and
how a military action like this has targeted and precise
and successful that it was, can help us avoid further conflict,
(01:28):
can help us avoid a nuclear Iran, can put them
back in their box where they belong. Peace through strength,
that means both of those things.
Speaker 3 (01:38):
I had all these libs coming at me in Atoll.
I thought you were anti war RAI. It was, oh,
come on, aren't you going to condemn? This is not
America first? It's America first. It's America primarily because it
serves our national interests. Having a denuclearized Iran always was
in our international interest, no matter what President Obama tried
(01:59):
to sh shoehorn in with some kind of deal with
the country that you cannot bargain with, cannot negotiate with,
cannot reason with. This is a militant, extremist, radical regime.
What are you hoping to extract from them?
Speaker 1 (02:15):
Exactly? If you give them palettess of cash, if you
unfreeze their bank accounts, if you give them the green
light to develop nuclear power, of course they're going to
abuse it, and that's what happened. And don't take my
word for it. Don't even take President Trump's word for it,
although he's seen the Intel reports and I believe his
interpretation of them. But the IAEA point blank said heron's
(02:37):
not holding up there into the bargain here, they're over
enriching these amounts of uranium that can be weaponized once
they reach ninety percent. They're at like sixty percent. There's
no reason to have sixty percent enriched uranium if you're
using it for no other purpose than nuclear power, which
we all know was foolishness to believe in the first place.
(02:58):
That's not what they were doing, sitting on some of
the richest oil reserves in the world and without any
kind of motivation to go green. That's not who they are,
that's not what they're about. It's not a leftist regime.
It's an authoritarian, extremist Islamo fascist regime. They're not gonna
want to enter into the green New Deal of Iran.
(03:21):
Anybody believes that, I'm sorry, is point blank just moronic.
That's what that is. So not real comfortable with John Bolton.
The nation building thing makes me cringe. You know, regime change. No, No,
it's not up to us to do that. Now we
can unseat the current regime, and that presents a problem.
There there is no option here that's a perfect threading
(03:44):
in the needle of if we just do this, and
it'll be you know, rainbows and unicorns for all the
rest of time, and Iran will be peaceful, and you know,
the greatest is liberators like we were told with Iraq,
and there'd be a democratic Iran that there might not be,
And there is an uncertainty here that will follow that
we won't have any power to do anything about, nor
(04:05):
should we, because the more Americans try to have influence
in this, and I'm talking about American leaders like Trump,
like the military, the more the Iranian people are going
to resist it. They don't want to have any kind
of power structure leadership installed and impressed upon them. And
I've also followed various Iranian resistance accounts. They've reached out
(04:27):
to me directly and personally. I'm not sure why. They
just maybe they like the cut of my jib. I
don't know, because I'm not Iranian. I don't have any
personal affiliation to any of them other than yeah, I'd
like to see the current Iranian regime fall, but what
replaces it. They don't want the sha back, raise a Pavlavi,
they don't want that monarchy back. But what do they want?
(04:48):
They've never been asked because they're living under the thumb
of the Ayahtola, and if they do say what they want,
they'll be hanged or shot, or be headed or stoned
or maybe all the above, burned alive be another one,
Joan of Arc. So John Bolton, he's getting a little
too excited, little too excited. I thought this was a measured, military,
(05:09):
precise strike by the president. It was warranted, it was justified,
it was a long time coming. I agree with all
of that. But this should be a means to an end,
and I mean an end, an end to a nuclear Iran.
Is that what we're getting here? The part that I
feel better about when I feel kind of uneasy about
aligning with what anything? John Bolton says, I call him
(05:30):
the lowrus. He's got a mustache and everywhere we go
he wants war. Putin's oh that guy, he wants war.
And Trump's not a big fan of his. And for
good reason, because Bolton is this you know, old school
throwback bush chainey, neo kN war hawk. I'm not about
any of that. I know a lot of you aren't either.
(05:51):
We're tired of that. I am tired of being lied to,
and I don't like the rhetoric being ratcheted up about
regime change and now though, I mean that's the question
that Thomas Massey's asking in others like, well, we've known
about this Iranian threat for over forty five years. They've
killed Americans, we've known that they've pursued nuclear that, we've
(06:11):
known that. What changed now? And I think that we
are owed as a public, as American voters, is Trump supporters,
as just American citizens who don't like Trump, any of
us are owed in explanation at some point as to
what happened here. But let's look under the hood. What
are we doing here? Why do we do this? And
I believe that President Trump will do that in due time,
(06:32):
But you don't do that right out front. Go Okay,
here's what we're doing, and here's why we're doing it,
and here's exactly when we're doing it. I mean, Donald
Trump made fun of a reporter asking him that like
a week ago, Like I'm gonna tell you, well, I'm
gonna tell his when Yeah, you want to go there
and watch. Okay now, but I do feel good that
John Brennan, who's as corruptive an official as there is
(06:53):
a former in the administration. This man should be prosecuted,
says that Trump somehow put us in this position because
he backed out of the Iran nuclear deal.
Speaker 4 (07:02):
It is come on, do you think we'd be in
this position now if the US had not pulled out
of the Iran nuclear deal in the first Trump administration?
Speaker 5 (07:10):
Absolutely not, because the Bordeaux was prohibited from enriching uranium
until twenty thirty, and so Trump's decision to tear up
that agreement and to abandon it the Iranian's wordhering to it, the.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
United States was not.
Speaker 5 (07:24):
So I think the United States has had a chance
to prevent this from happening, but unfortunately, I think the
Trump administration has decided to go forward with bb netyahu's
plans to do as much damage as possible inside of
Iran and so toward regime change.
Speaker 1 (07:41):
Do you really believe do you honestly believe that Iran
was adhering to their end of the deal when it
came to the nuclear arrangement that was made between President
Obama and Iran or Joe Biden who reignited that this part.
Speaker 5 (07:54):
Bordeaux was prohibited from enriching uranium until twenty.
Speaker 1 (07:59):
Thirty that did not happen. We have direct evidence refuting
that by the IAEA that they were in fact enriching
uranium to high percentages sixty percent, with the ultimate goal
of making a nuclear weapon. That's the only purpose that
that level of enriched uranium would be used for. Brennan,
(08:19):
is I mean out of his depth? Is to put
it mildly. But let's go back to the Marco Rubio
exchange with Margaret Brennan, And in case you missed it,
notice we're going to do the whole critiquing mass media
class room session here where she begins in her line
of questioning from this very adamant, self assured, confident place
(08:43):
of I know what these intelligence reports say, and so
do you. And don't they say this, mister secretary? And
aren't you saying that the Ayatola did not directly order
the enrichment and weaponization of uranium. Isn't that what was
in the reports? Q? Marco Rubio, who says no, that's
not what was in the reports.
Speaker 4 (09:04):
Are you saying there that the United States did not
see intelligence that the Supreme Leader had ordered weaponization or
that's irrelevant.
Speaker 6 (09:13):
I think that question being asked on the media, that's
an irrelevant question.
Speaker 4 (09:16):
They had met in US intelligence assessment. You know it's not,
yes it was.
Speaker 6 (09:22):
I know that better than you know that, and I
know that that's not the case.
Speaker 1 (09:25):
But whether the order was given.
Speaker 6 (09:27):
And the people will say that it doesn't matter the
order was given. They have everything they need to build
nuclear weapons.
Speaker 1 (09:33):
He's exactly right. She's exactly wrong for her to suggest
that it was whoever ordered the code read and that's
why Santiago got it. No, whether the ayah Tola was
in on the decision making or not, he probably has
a level of plausible deniability. They want to insulate him
from those decisions. Don't ask, don't tell. So various military
(09:53):
leaders in coalition, with a lot of these so called scientists, physicists,
those developing the nuclear energy and technology on behalf of
the regime, who were also eliminated. I might add, they
knew how to enrich this uranium. They didn't need permission
from the Ayatola. They didn't need an order directly from
(10:16):
the Supreme leader of Iran. And again to my earlier point,
they would make all the sense in the world that
they would eliminate remove the Iyatola from that decision so
that he could not be blamed for it, but would
ostensibly sign off on it with a wink and a nod.
Just don't let me know what you're dead, that sort
of thing. Riuvio continues to press back on this from
(10:37):
Margaret Brennan, and notice how she withers in his presence
as he just flattens her.
Speaker 6 (10:42):
Why would you bury things in a mountain three hundred
feet under the ground. Why would you bury six Why
did they have sixty percent in enrich uranium? You don't
need sixty percent in rich area. The only countries in
the world that have uranium at sixty percent are countries
that have nuclear weapons, because it can quickly make it
ninety They.
Speaker 7 (10:57):
Have all the elements they have.
Speaker 6 (10:58):
Why do they have a space par again, is Aron
going to go to the moon?
Speaker 7 (11:01):
No, they're trying to build an ICBM.
Speaker 4 (11:03):
But that's.
Speaker 1 (11:07):
Iran will only go to the moon if we put
them there. And you know what I mean. And this
is where She gets very haughty about what the intelligence
says and how these reports are used, and just like,
what are you talking about.
Speaker 4 (11:21):
That's a question of intent. And you know in the
intelligence assessment that it was that Iran wanted to be
a threshold.
Speaker 7 (11:27):
See you use those levers.
Speaker 4 (11:28):
I'm talking on what the intelligence March assessment. And that's
why I was asking you if you know something more from.
Speaker 6 (11:34):
That's an inaccurate representation of it. That's an accurate representation
of it. That's not how intelligence is read, that's not
how intelligence is used.
Speaker 7 (11:42):
Here's what the whole world knows.
Speaker 6 (11:43):
Forget about intelligence, what the IAEA knows. They are enriching
uranium well beyond anything you need for a for a
for a civil nuclear program.
Speaker 7 (11:53):
So why would you enrich uranium.
Speaker 6 (11:55):
At sixty percent right if you don't intend to one
day use it to take it to ninety and build
a weapon. Why why are you developing icvms? Why do
you have eight thousand short range missiles in two to
three thousand long mid range missiles that you continue to develop?
Speaker 7 (12:08):
Why do you do all these things?
Speaker 1 (12:10):
Failed questions and even Mary Brennet at this point, yeah,
well yeah, yeah, no, you're right, okay, okay, And then
she finishes in this position, remember where she started, and
then witness where she finishes here, where she backs down
to a certain square, much less sure of herself.
Speaker 6 (12:27):
I have to everything they need for a nuclear weapon.
They have the delivery mechanisms, they have the enrichment capability,
they have the highly.
Speaker 7 (12:33):
Enriched uranium that is stored. That's all we need to see.
Speaker 8 (12:36):
Right.
Speaker 6 (12:36):
Well, now she has a regime that's already involved in
terrorism and proxies and all kinds of things are on.
There are the source of all and no one's disputing.
Speaker 4 (12:44):
No one's disputing that. I'm not doing that here. And
they were censured at the IAEA for that enrichment and
for violating their non proliferation agreements. I was simply asking
if we had intelligence.
Speaker 1 (12:54):
No, you weren't that there was an order to.
Speaker 4 (12:56):
Weaponize, because you said weaponization.
Speaker 6 (12:58):
Ambitions wentagics weren't think they need to build a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 7 (13:02):
And that's more than enough.
Speaker 1 (13:03):
Yeah, she's stuck on this talking point of did the
Ayatolla the Supreme Leader authorized the weaponization of the nuclear
uh program. He didn't need to. And that was the
point that Rubio was making there It is irrelevant. Iran
had the motive, certainly to develop a nuclear weapon for
(13:25):
the region and to enhance their power within it. They
had the means because Obama and Biden green lighted them.
And of course they're going to push the margins, cheat
and do things under the cover of darkness with the
IAEA only occasionally coming in and what were they going
to do? Write a strongly worded letter like Team America
World Police with Hans Blicks almost going to be the
(13:46):
consequence of Iran continuing to flout the IAEA and the
levels of enrichment that they were supposed to stay with,
and they weren't doing it. They weren't coloring within the
lines because they knew they didn't have to because Obama
and baia I would not hold them accountable. There was
no motive for them to adhere to any deal. There
was every opportunity and motive to violate the deal, to
(14:11):
push the margins, to test the boundaries, just like a
little kid that sees what they can get away with.
Vice President j. D. Vance, also on the Sunday talk
shows Circuit and pushing back on the Iran foreign ministers,
saying that the US with these bombings well, they did it.
They've blown up diplomacy. It's over. Well, let's talk.
Speaker 9 (14:32):
About the possibility of negotiations. I mean, the Iranian foreign
minister were responded to the strikes this morning saying, Israel
and the US have quote blown up diplomacy. Mister Vice President,
is there any real hope for diplomacy or is diplomacy
dead at this point?
Speaker 10 (14:49):
Well, I think the foreign minister is exactly wrong. We
didn't blow up diplomacy. We only took this action, Kristen,
when it was clear, as the President said, that the
Iranians were tapping us along.
Speaker 1 (14:59):
I think it's important for the American.
Speaker 10 (15:00):
People to appreciate here that if you go back to
March of this year, we had the entire administration engaged
in this diplomatic effort, and frankly, in March of this year,
we had some optimism. How do we get from there
to now? And the answer is we felt very strongly
that the Iranians were stonewalling us. They weren't taking this seriously.
They were trying to draw this process out as long
(15:22):
as possible so that they could rebuild their nuclear weapons
program without the threat of American action.
Speaker 1 (15:28):
They had many opportunities the Iranians to sit down in
talks negotiations with President Trump. That's what he wanted, That's
what he kept clamoring for, both behind closed doors, private
phone conversations, public comments that he was making and directing
at the Iranian regime. He even spoke about a two
week window. You heard this last week now. I ended
up launching these strikes two days in because of what
(15:51):
Vice President Vance just said that it really did appear
that Iran had no interest in trying to reach any
kind of compromise or have any kind of talks along
those lines. And this very saint Iran foreign minister said
that they had no interest in having those conversations with
the United States, especially after the Israeli strikes had begun.
Speaker 10 (16:09):
We had a limited window in which we could take
out this four DOAU nuclear facility, in particular, the President
decided to take it. But we didn't blow up the diplomacy.
The diplomacy never was given a real chance by the Iranians.
And our hope, Kristen, as the President said repeatedly, is
that this maybe can reset here. The Iranians have a choice.
(16:29):
They can go down the path of peace or they
can go down the path of this ridiculous brinksmanship, of
funding terrorism, of trying to build a nuclear weapon, and
that's just not something the United States can accept.
Speaker 1 (16:42):
They can't, we cannot accept that Iran has now been
delivered that message. But it's in the language, the only
language they truly understand in Iran and for the most
part that region, which is a brute force show of strength.
That is what happened on Saturday night. And JD. Vance
then takes the opportunity with Christian Welker this from Meet
the Press, speak directly to the Iranian leadership, and he
(17:05):
spikes the football here.
Speaker 10 (17:07):
I want to say something, Christen, just to the Iranian leadership. Look,
they have tried to build a nuclear weapons program.
Speaker 1 (17:14):
That program is now destroyed.
Speaker 10 (17:15):
They tried to build a conventional missile program to attack
neighbors in the region. That missile program has shown to
be a failure. They have funded terrorism aggressively in the region,
and now most of their terrorism proxies are destroyed. The
Iranians are clearly not very good at war. Perhaps they
should follow President Trump's lead and give piece a chance.
(17:36):
If they're serious about it. I guarantee you the president
of the United States is too.
Speaker 1 (17:40):
What President Trump has in abundance here that I think
is far more effective than his first term. All due
respect to Mike Pence, and I say that as strongly
as I can state it is he has now derivative voices,
and the Vice President JD. Vans, the Secretary of State
Marco Rubio, and I would even fold in Secretary of
(18:01):
Defense Pete Hegsett that speak with one mind and one voice,
and one mission and one set of priorities. And they
are effective stewards of the America first message of trump Ism,
and they are setting themselves up, each of them, to
be formidable candidates in twenty twenty eight. Think about how
they are shining, both Marco Rubio and JD. Vance in
(18:24):
these environments with hostile media, making these points, doing so effectively,
and doing so on behalf of the Trump administration. It's
going to be an interesting race heading into twenty twenty eight.
But in the here and now, this was a successful
military endeavor and we hope it builds a lasting piece.
(18:47):
All right, in the midst of solidifying my investments with
Trajan Wealth, yes, I'm giving you a first hand account,
and I can advise that you do the same that
you get all of your investments heading in the same
direction and on the same page. And I feel so
much better about where I'm going from here because I
did just that. And I sat down with Andy Justice
and the folks at Trajan Wealth not once, but twice.
(19:08):
There could be more meetings in the future, and I
can definitely communicate with them whenever I need them. They
are accessible, and they got back to me with an email.
I just sent today this one from Ryan Pursley about
investing another dollar amount in my IRA that I have
set up. It's kind of a base level thing. I'm
hoping to move into stocks at some point with a
higher level investment. But first things first, and Rome wasn't
(19:28):
built in a day and all that kind of stuff.
And you can determine where you are. You might be
further along than I am, and I hope that you are,
and you can ascertain that in a phone call at
seven two oh four zero five thirty three hundred. You
can also set up a free one on one consultation
so that they can direct you to a plan that's
uniquely suited and tailored to your needs and your level
(19:50):
of risk tolerance. Seven two oh four zero five thirty
three hundred with locations in Broomfield, Greenwood Village and Loveland.
You can also find out more online at trajan Wealth
dot com. That's Trajanwealth dot com. Tradean Wealth, a proud
sponsor of Ryan Schuling Live advisory service is offered through
Trajan Wealth LLC and SEC Registered Investment Advisor. Paid advertisement.
Speaker 7 (20:15):
To La.
Speaker 1 (20:21):
Calda. I always think of Fred Willard and Catherine O'Hara
from Waiting for Guffman and the sketch that they do
for Corky played by Christopher Cast. Have you seen that
movie Shannon, Oh Dude, you gotta Oh my goodness, Waiting
for Guffman, Best in Show and a Mighty Wind. It
was like a trilogy. The one had nothing to do
(20:43):
with the other two, but it was the same troop
of actors and the three that I mentioned. Michael McKeon
is in a couple of them as well. A Cast
one thousand, Parker Posey names off the top of my head.
This is late nineties, early two thousands. All three movies
are fantastic, but Waiting for Gufman was the original, with
Fred Willard and Captain O'Hara doing a sketch of this song,
(21:05):
singing it and singing it quite well. She's a good singer.
I got a lot of news to pass along here
and I will do that Ian just a moment. But
Representative Thomas Massey, he went on with Tim Poole on
Tim's podcast. I've been trying to get Representative Massey to
come on this program. I have direct contact with his people,
and I'd like to have a conversation with it, because
(21:25):
I always preface it this way. I am a big
fan of being sassy with Massey. Sometimes he gets sassine.
You don't know what he's gonna do, you don't know
which way he's gonna go. But he's his own person.
It's all the same praise I give, let's say, Senator
John Fetterman, which I know to the depths of my
soul that neither Fetterman or Massey can be bought. They
(21:47):
are their own men. They think for themselves. They don't,
you know, here to focus groups or donors. They do
what they think is right, and I'm not going to
agree with them. A lot of the time. I agree
with Massey a lot more often then I agree with
save Fetterman. But I respect both men. And here's what
Representative mass He had to say about Trump going after
(22:08):
him on truth social.
Speaker 11 (22:10):
It's amazing that the president of the United States, the
guy who launched seven B two bombers to the other
side of the planet to bomb targets over there and
returned them, he got up and spent fifteen minutes writing
a tweet about a Republican, not a Democrat, a Republican.
Speaker 1 (22:29):
Congressman from Kentucky.
Speaker 11 (22:31):
I responded to that tweet, actually quoted it, and I
just said, you know, President Trump's declared so much war
on me in the last day that it should require
an Act of Congress at this point.
Speaker 1 (22:45):
And he's not inaccurate on this because here's the post
from seven hours ago. Trump retruthing himself on a post
from yesterday. Get this bum out of office asap, and
he has bumming quotes for some the things. There's so
many things I love about President Trump's true social posts
boson x, the random capitalization that's one of my favorites,
(23:08):
and the random scare quotes around certain words. Get this
so called bum in quotes out of office asap, and
he says Congressman Thomas Massey of Kentucky is not Maga,
even though he likes to say he is. Actually Maga,
doesn't want him, doesn't know him, and doesn't respect him.
(23:32):
He's a negative force who almost always votes know no
matter how good something may be. He's a simple minded
grandstander who thinks it's good politics for Ron to have
the highest level nuclear weapon while at the same time
yelling death to America at every chance they get. So
(23:53):
there's talk about primary ying. If that's a word, I
just made it up Thomas Massey, and I just I
don't see the lane for victory here in Massey makes
that case here, and he makes it well, you.
Speaker 11 (24:06):
Can't run to the right of me in Kentucky.
Speaker 1 (24:08):
There is no room to the right of me.
Speaker 11 (24:11):
So for three primaries in a row, people have tried
running to the Trump of me.
Speaker 7 (24:15):
They say I'm not Trump enough.
Speaker 11 (24:17):
But the reality is, when you dig down into it,
I'm the original.
Speaker 1 (24:20):
America first congressman.
Speaker 11 (24:22):
That has always been my platform, even when it costs
me in popularity. And so over twelve years, I've developed
that understanding with my constituents.
Speaker 1 (24:33):
And I think that's a key distinction. And his Brownie
office says a distinction with a difference this one has
that difference. Is he maga? Does he make America great again?
Is he's sporting the red hat? Is he going to
Trump rallies? No? No, Thomas Massey's not that guy. Is
the America first he is, and he's he's what I
(24:54):
would call in many instances, and I think this is
where Tucker Carlston has migrated to and I'm not there
America only. Well, here's the simple reality of the matter.
We cannot exist in a vacuum. We do exist in
the context of the world stage where not the world's policemen.
I don't want us to be. We shouldn't be entangled
(25:15):
in foreign wars of mis and venture. I don't want
us to be. But to divorce us from any responsibility,
any kind of leadership role on the global stage is
it's just not possible. We could do it, but we
would do so much to our own detriment. We have
to exist in a world around us that includes nations
(25:38):
of allies and adversaries, and you have to deal with
the real Would I prefer that we could just go
about our business and be Americans and do American things
and only care about America. That sounds nice, but again,
it's not realistic. And I think Massy fits into a
category certainly of Congress members that are America only. In
a lot of cases, I think we should be America first.
(26:00):
We should not go around engaging in military expeditions. Let's say, like, oh,
I don't know, Vietnam that is based on a theory
that is based on a theory, a domino theory that
a Vietnam falls, all the other countries in the Far East,
the Philippines, Japan, They're all going to fall to communism.
Did that happen? It did not happen. So it was
(26:20):
a flawed theory. It's a failed theory, and many young
American servicemen died in the name of that theory to
help bail out the French again again and try to
salvage something in South Vietnam that resembled a democracy. Is
that worth American lives? No? No, it was not, It
(26:42):
is not, it won't ever be. So I'm on board
with a lot of where Representative Massey's head is at,
but he goes a little little far off that end
of America first, where I just think it's not in
our best interest to only think of our interest exclude
that they're not intertwined with anybody else for any other reason.
(27:04):
We do have a national interest in the survival of
Israel in the Middle East. I would say that to
what degree that's the debatable part. And I will acknowledge that.
Here's the math that Thomas Massey is citing and the
type of candidate that he thinks the Trump Maga PAK
might try to run against him. It's going to be
a hell of a fight.
Speaker 11 (27:25):
I mean, I've never got less than seventy five percent
in any of my primaries.
Speaker 1 (27:29):
I'm not saying that's going to be the case this time.
Speaker 11 (27:31):
I'll probably have millions and millions.
Speaker 1 (27:33):
Of dollars spent against me.
Speaker 11 (27:34):
They still haven't found a candidate yet who wants to
try this, and trust me, they're searching hard in my district. Eventually,
they'll find some schmuck to be in the TV commercials
who has no record whatsoever, and they'll try to make
him out to be the next Ronald Reagan or something true.
Speaker 1 (27:53):
Now ask yourself this question too, Would you rather the
Republican Party under the leadership of Donald Trump, or any
special interest pack that you might support or donate to.
Would you rather they target somebody like Thomas Massey, who
is with the Republican Party on a vast majority of issues,
waste that time, effort, money ads in trying to unseat
(28:15):
Massy or in going after these purple seats and flipping
them red. Now, I know a lot of you're saying, well,
what if we just get like a rhino in there? Now,
I understand that Thomas Massey's not a rhino. That term's
been overused and it does not extend to him. That's
not what I would categorize Representative Massey as. But he
can become a whipping boy. And I love this analogy
(28:35):
that he uses. This is kind of Kentucky coming out
in in my dad is why is Donald Trump so
focused on him? Him in particular him specifically.
Speaker 11 (28:43):
He's coming after me to show the other Republicans in Congress. Hey,
that horse got out of the barn, and we're whipping
that horse as hard as we can. You can't withstand
that kind of whipping, You better stay in the barn.
And I've had interactions with President Trump going all the
way back to twenty twenty, some of them being cordial,
(29:03):
some of them been adversarial. What he does know is
I'm not changing my mind on this stuff.
Speaker 1 (29:10):
He's not. He's talking in this case about the big
beautiful bill, and he's not changing his mind. I don't
think on Iran, and that's fine. We don't have to
be a monolith here. And I might disagree with Congressman Massy,
but he represents a district in Kentucky that fervently supports him.
So in order to unseat him, are you going to
come up with a candidate who's more popular than Massy
(29:30):
that can get more of the vote in a primary.
I just don't see that as being a realistic objective.
And this is just Donald Trump, I think, overreacting in
an emotional way to a guy that he just can't
keep in line. Like you said, he's the horse that
got out of the barn. I think that's an apt description,
and that Massey owns that and wears that actually rather proudly.
(29:50):
So you know, there's not going to be a lot
of convincing him. It's tough because it's a narrowly divided House.
And if the bill comes back and has got some
Senate revisions to it, which may include taking away the
salt exemptions for New York and California based on state taxes. Well,
now you've got the contingent of Republicans that are from
California and New York. That might mean no longer support
(30:12):
the bill. But now Thomas Massey comes along, well now
I will support it. And this could get really messy
between now and July fourth, which is when we were
told that the Senate was going to have their version
to send back over to the House. Are you sassy
with Massy or do you think he's just kind of
making political theater out of this. I want to get
your thoughts at five, seven, seven, three nine, and we'll
(30:34):
close out with those and much more after this on
Ryan Schuling Live. I just remember the Fred Armison sketch
on Saturday Night Live where he's playing moon, I'm a
Demi Jod, I'm a Dinna jod, that's it yep, And
it was this song. Who was set to this song?
I ran so far away and yet our B two
(30:56):
bombers can reach it. Ryan Schiling Live wrap up on
this Monday edition dedicated to the ever breaking news over
the weekend and then including today in case you're just
tuning in just getting out of work. Dan capls will
be next. I'm sure he'll be talking about this at length.
Iran lobbed what was it, fourteen missiles toured an American
base in Qatar, but apparently gave warning, gave a heads
(31:20):
up to not only Katar, but the United States, is
what President Trump is claiming. Thirteen of the fourteen missiles
were intercepted, and the fourteenth fell harmlessly, I think, into
the sea. It was just say we let it go.
It died a blaze of a life. And this on
CNN's head. There's is good news coming in left and right.
This from Jeff Zeleny's CNN oil drops, meaning the price
(31:44):
of oil stocks rise after Iran's intercepted strike on US base.
That's just today. So that's good news on both those
fronts for President Trump. More good news for the Trump
administration the Supreme Court ruling six' three Allowing President trump
to con continued deporting criminal aliens to third party. Countries
this just, in And i'll give you one guess as
(32:05):
to who the three dissenting justices. Were remember When Ruth Bader,
Ginsburg may she rest in, peace passed away and, There
oh she'll always be known for her scathing. Descents those, Descents,
oh they're going to live in the historical annals of
time and they'll be referred back to those. Descents, WELL
i mean, maybe but it's to. MEMORIALIZE i guess a
(32:26):
justice disagreeing with a vert a ruling by the higher.
Court but it's the losing. Side so Is Sonya Soda
mayor penned a scathing. Descent it's always a scathing descent
and was joined by fellow Liberals Elena kagan And Kintanji Brown,
jackson who just criticized her fellow conservative members from their
(32:46):
two textual they're textualists and their interpretation of The. Constitute,
yeah that's why they were appointed. There they're. Originalists that's
how they viewed The. Constitution and if it's going to be,
changed here's how you do. It, Uh congress amends. It
The Supreme court doesn't do it by, fiat at least
it shouldn't by having superpowers above and beyond that Of
(33:08):
congress or The. Presidency these are three co equal, branches
The judiciary and The Supreme court of The United. States
their job is to interpret The, constitution interpret the. Laws that's,
it not make. Law but that's HOW kbj would have.
Speaker 5 (33:22):
It.
Speaker 1 (33:23):
Anyway The Supreme court allowing The trump administration to restart
swift removals of migrants to countries other than their, homelands
lifting for now a court order requiring they get a
chance to challenge the. Deportation this is from The New York.
Post The High court's action came After District Judge Brian
murphy In boston shocker found the administration that violated his
(33:45):
order by sending eight people To South sudan In. May
who the hell died and Made Brian murphy king poohbab
of everything legal In. America that's WHAT i don't.
Speaker 8 (33:55):
Get the, gull the, audacity the balls of these judges
in district courts throughout the, country liberal ones, here they're
Everywhere San, FRANCISCO, Dc, boston wherever that they could just
rise up.
Speaker 1 (34:08):
And based on their own. Opinion they're not elected by,
anybody by the, way they're appointed political appointees that they
supersede The Chief executive of The United, states The commander
in chief of The United, states the duly Elected president
of The United states who won the Electoral. College, no
this is where Just Chief Justice roberts needs to step
(34:29):
in and they have to put their foot down on.
This once and for. All we cannot have. This AND
i would say it if there were a democratic president
and some podent judges from rural red states kept popping,
up and you can't do. That you can't do, that
you can't do. That we can't have a president cannot effectively.
Govern then a president must be free to make bad
decisions in some, cases and he will be judged by the,
(34:49):
people and he will suffer the consequences of the ballot
box in the next. Election by any every two, years
let's get some text five, seven seven thirty. Nine so
painful to listen to these idiot news. Shows kristin And
margaret think they're so. Smart, Yeah Kristin welker For meet
The press And Margaret brennan From face The. Nation AND
i think both Jad vance And Marco rubio handle themselves
(35:10):
with a, plumb respectively in that. Order, RYAN i think
this latest foreign policy By trump shows us that if
he was re elected in twenty, twenty those Thirteen marines
would still be. Alive Joe biden In afghanistan withdrawal was
a clown. Show, YES i, agree one hundred. Percent and
even if if the worst case scenario had, Happened President
trump would not have been looking at his. Watch we
(35:32):
still have that that photo in the control room That
i'm pointing at right now in The Kahouse, Studios biden
with a stupid mask ON covid times looking at his.
Watch when DO i get out of? Here when the
bodies of Those marines arrived back On american? Soil, disgraceful
absolutely one hundred, percent, Patty patty chiming. In Has biden
given a statement yet or are they still trying to
(35:53):
explain him the difference on the military strike In iran
and the volcanic eruption To? Hawaii, PATTY i still don't
think he knows what happened In hawaii at. All that'll
do it for me for. Now stay tuned The Dan
caplis show us. Next i'll be back with you On
tuesday with More Ryan Schuling live
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
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
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!