10-13-25 - *FULL SHOW* Jimmy Sengenberger Filling In For Ross

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Looking forward to a great week ahead here on at Koa,
with so much to talk about. The hostages are home.
I think all of them are home now, those who
are alive. President Trump was celebrating overnight, well overnight for

(00:21):
US was I think two thirty am here in the USA,
and he was giving a speech to the forgive me
if I don't pronounce it right, the Kanesse is the
k Silent. I'm not sure how they pronounced the parliament
for Israel. But he gave an hour long speech in

(00:44):
Israel to their parliament, and I listened to it.

Speaker 2 (00:49):
On the way in what I could.

Speaker 1 (00:51):
I caught about twenty minutes, the first twenty minutes of it,
and I have to say it was typical Trump celebratory fashion,
like that is through and.

Speaker 2 (01:04):
Through what it is, what it was.

Speaker 1 (01:08):
He praised though every member of his negotiating team that
was critical from the big players, including Secretary of State
Marco Rubio and Secretary of War Pete Hegsath, but most especially.

Speaker 2 (01:29):
A little bit.

Speaker 1 (01:29):
Towards Jared Kushner, and gave of course a shout out
to Kushner's wife Ivanka Trump and Steve Whitkoff got a
significant amount of play the US Special Envoy to the
Middle East. He gave him, I don't know five six

(01:50):
minutes talking about him, singing his praises, celebrating all that
wit Cough brought to the table and brings to the table.

Speaker 2 (01:59):
He told the story.

Speaker 1 (02:00):
Of how Whitkoff spent five hours in a room with
Putin the first time he met him. And the impression
that I got was twofold one. It was celebratory. He
used this opportunity before the Parliament to bask in the
glow of well earned appreciation.

Speaker 2 (02:22):
By the way, I do want to confirm it, I
was correct.

Speaker 1 (02:25):
All twenty living hostages have been released by Hamas. It's
just a matter of getting those who have not been released,
toward deceased who were murdered by Hamas released and back home.
But back to the speech, he was doing two main things.
One of course celebrating and basking in the glow and

(02:47):
being able to say, look at this achievement. But also
he clearly was sending a message to Putin.

Speaker 2 (02:54):
Bringing him up within the first twenty minutes.

Speaker 1 (02:57):
Yes, in the context of Witkoff and how he spent
five or six hours with Putin in a room the
first time he met him, but also in the context
of how there's a deal to be made with Ukraine,
he said, now I'm.

Speaker 2 (03:15):
Eight for eight.

Speaker 1 (03:17):
I've struck eight piece deals, prevented eight wars or stopped,
stopped or prevented eight wars, and I'm going to keep
adding to that. Clearly sending a message of resolve and
intention intentionality to Putin. And I think that was an
important aspect to this speech, at least from the twenty

(03:40):
minutes that I was able to catch this morning. That
sent a clear signal for moving forward with Putin in
Russia and other engagements. Trump did tout Midnight Operation Midnight Hammer,
this significant move over the summer when the US bombed

(04:03):
the Iranian nuclear facilities with those bunker busters, and how
remarkable that was. He touted taking out key Iranian military leaders.
He touted all the military supports, the strength of the
weapons that the US provided to Israel to help them
prosecute the war against Tomas, and highlighted peace through strength,

(04:31):
which of course really traces back that was the Moniker
and the doctrine of Ronald Reagan to end the Cold War. Well,
Trump has adopted it. Bb net and Yahoo has adopted it.
And continually reiterated it. So it is a remarkable feat

(04:54):
what has happened here deserving without a doubt of the.

Speaker 2 (04:59):
No Peace Prize.

Speaker 1 (05:00):
Let's just put it all together with the other things.
I mean, I've said for years that the Abraham Accords
deserved a Nobel Peace Prize for Trump, that he had
earned it because of the peace brought about between Israel
and several Arab countries. It was a remarkable achievement that
has laid the groundwork for years to come and helped

(05:23):
lay the groundwork for what we.

Speaker 2 (05:25):
Are seeing now with Gaza.

Speaker 1 (05:29):
Trump's ultimate goal is to expand the Abraham Accords, to
get other countries involved by resolving this war, and God
willing it holds that there's more to be done that
they can disarm Hamas than things will happen to make
it a lasting peace. But even so, bringing an end

(05:54):
to this war, and in part doing so by getting
partners like Cutter for example, involved in bringing about this end,
helping to make it happen, is significant, and it traces
back to the Abraham Accords. That was the opportunity to

(06:16):
lay the groundwork for future negotiations, building relationships, and that's
the whole idea of a businessman, of a real estate guy.
I mean, Trump loves making deals, and when he has
the opportunity to do so, he's going to do so,
particularly on the world stage. Now, we can have all
kinds of criticisms of some of his domestic policies and

(06:40):
even some of his foreign affairs related.

Speaker 2 (06:43):
Policies like trade.

Speaker 1 (06:48):
I will consistently be a Trump critic on trade, and
I think he's really missing opportunities here with how he's
approached it. Then you can critique, if you want, some
of his creation policies.

Speaker 2 (07:03):
Or other things.

Speaker 1 (07:04):
But when we look at the predictions that Donald Trump
was going to be a man who brings war to
the world.

Speaker 2 (07:14):
That has not happened.

Speaker 1 (07:16):
He struck Iran, everybody was going crazy, Oh my gosh,
what in the world is happening. Here are we going
to war with Iran? Didn't happen. Iran barely struck back.
Then here with Israel, he ends this war in Gaza, which,
by the way, let's talk.

Speaker 2 (07:37):
About that blood libel that.

Speaker 1 (07:42):
Israel, the Jewish state has been engaging in genocide against
the Palestinians.

Speaker 2 (07:50):
Because if you're trying.

Speaker 1 (07:51):
To engage in genocide, you will not just pull back
on your war like this. You will not show the
kind of restraint that Israel has done throughout the war
like they always do. Let's give warnings when we're gonna
bomb civilian areas to get them out, do what we

(08:15):
can to avoid civilian casualties against an enemy that doesn't
give a damn about how many civilians they kill. How
the war started because on October seventh, just over two
years ago, Comas brutally attacked innocence, mostly innocent civilians, capturing

(08:38):
well over two hundred hostages, slaughtering over twelve hundred.

Speaker 2 (08:44):
People, many of whom were just at a music festival.
I was playing a gig.

Speaker 1 (08:50):
At Tea Birds and we ridge on Saturday, playing some music.
And to think that there were people enjoying music and
being there because they wanted to stand for peace. They
believed the peace could be reached. What is happening now?
And they were killed in cold blood, raped, tortured, innocent children, brutalized,

(09:17):
the most brutal assault on the Jewish people since the Holocaust.
And that's how it all began. And then they still
showed restraint. Everyone who has claimed genocide by Israel o's
Israel and the Jewish people, an apology and a recanting

(09:40):
because it was BS when they said it, and it's
clearly BS now. I got to run to a break.
More on this coming up on the other side. But
it is a fantastic day and a true achievement for
President Donald Trump and bb net and Yahoo and the
whole team. I'm Jimmy Sangenbergrin f Roskaminski Kawa. President Trump

(10:03):
speaking early this morning, at least for us, it was
what was at midnight twelve thirty mountain time, two thirty
East coast, something along those lines, speaking to the Israeli Parliament.
And here's a little bit of his speech this morning.

Speaker 3 (10:25):
To two harrowing years and darkness and captivity, twenty courageous
hostages are returning to the glorious embrace of their families,
and it is glorious. Twenty eight more precious loved ones
are coming home at last to rest in this sacred
soil for all of time, and after so many years

(10:49):
of unceasing war and endless danger. Today the skies are calm,
the guns are silent, the sirens are still, and the
sun rises on a holy land that is finally at peace,
a land and a region that will live God willing
in peace for all eternity.

Speaker 1 (11:12):
Now there's some real optimism there that is encouraging, and
of course it's also some praise that he likes to
sing upon himself and his friends, whether that's personal friends
or it is in this case his allies, those that
helped to bring about the significant achievement, and there is

(11:34):
just cause for that kind of praise. In fact, Jonathan
k Part was on TBS and he's one of the
commentators along with David Brooks, and I think he's a
commentator on MSNBC, and he imparted some praise upon the president.

Speaker 4 (11:52):
Look, I'm going to say something that I have never
said before and that this audience has never heard me
say before.

Speaker 2 (11:58):
Kudos to the President.

Speaker 4 (12:00):
I think we are at this point because the President
was single he was focused, single mindedly focused on getting something,
getting a deal done, getting.

Speaker 1 (12:10):
The hostages out, and that did. By the way, he
prompt a little joke for David brook I've.

Speaker 5 (12:14):
Got hope when Jonathan praised the president, So I got
my fingers crossed here.

Speaker 6 (12:19):
He deserves the Nobell price.

Speaker 2 (12:20):
I thought you're gonna go there, but k.

Speaker 1 (12:23):
Part added something sober that I think is absolutely right.

Speaker 4 (12:28):
The hard part comes after he leaves the region, after
we get past phase one, assuming we get the twenty,
that the Israeli hostages released, the twenty who were presumed
alive after the two thousand Palestinians are released by Israel.
Once we get past that, there are so many questions

(12:50):
that are still out there that leaves me skeptical that
my kudos to the President will will maintain.

Speaker 2 (12:57):
One.

Speaker 4 (12:58):
Will they be able to get ama Us disarmed too,
Will there be a legitimate negotiating partner among the Palestinians
for Israel and everyone to negotiate with an international stabilization
force for the area.

Speaker 2 (13:12):
And also the big.

Speaker 4 (13:13):
Thing, sort of a Palestinian self governance or, in other words,
a two states solution, something that Prime Minister Natagnan, who
has made clear he's not interested in. And if we're
going to get through all these phases of this of
this peace plan, the single minded focus of the President
that got us to this crucial point will be needed

(13:36):
for the next nineteen phases, and I just don't see
how he does that.

Speaker 1 (13:40):
It is going to be critical to see the next
steps and for the President to maintain focus on maintaining
and expanding this piece because it is a ceasefire fundamentally,
that's what it is now and the return of the hostages,
which is fantastic. Will Hamas disarm, Will they cease attacking Israel?

(14:00):
That is to be seen, and it's hard to have
too much confidence, but there's more than I think has
been going on behind the scenes. And Trump is at
a peace summit following up that speech in Israel. Now
he's in Egypt at a peace summit, a Middle East
peace summit, to build on that.

Speaker 2 (14:21):
If they play their cards right, this could.

Speaker 1 (14:25):
Be something lasting and something very meaningful. And gosh darn it,
I'm cautiously optimistic here then. That is based on what
happened with the Abraham Accords in his first term and
what we have seen build up so far in the
Middle East now, between this and Iran and other things

(14:47):
good to see. More to come as well on this topic,
and so much more to dive into. I'm Jimmy Sangenberger
filling in for ros Kaminsky, just getting warmed up here
on KOA. We will be talking more later about the
Middle East peace process and other related things with guests

(15:07):
Reuben Nevrette on more of the politics of this, and
retired Air Force Colonel Matt Yoakum later on in the
program on the military side, Middle East affairs.

Speaker 2 (15:18):
Those kinds of things.

Speaker 1 (15:19):
But I'll squeeze it a couple of texts before we
shift gears. Trump just said the people in Gaza need
to stand up and eradicate Hamas for peace to continue.
Do you think that is possible? That is the big question,
whether it's the people standing up to eradicate Hamas forcing
them to disarm.

Speaker 2 (15:40):
I wonder if after.

Speaker 1 (15:42):
Two years of the retaliatory strikes from Israel for the
heinous atrocities of Hamas and with other Middle Eastern countries,
Arab countries meeting with Trump. This is the thing. We
got this text from listener. All credit to Trump and

(16:03):
his team, but it's still so hard to listen to
him bragg on himself, not just here but in just
about everything he says.

Speaker 2 (16:10):
Slash rights. Yeah, it does get a little tiresome in.

Speaker 1 (16:12):
This case, though, he was, at least from what I
saw on this speech, spreading the love around to his team.

Speaker 2 (16:19):
He called Marco Rubio.

Speaker 1 (16:20):
He said He's going to go down in history as
the best Secretary of State, he praised Pete heg Seth,
Secretary of War, gave a lot of time to Steve Whitcoff,
the Special Envoy to the Middle East, and so forth.

Speaker 2 (16:35):
But here's what I think is going on.

Speaker 1 (16:38):
Trump seals this deal last week with his team, and
then you have the hostages released, those who are alive
finally back home. Then he speaks to the Israeli Parliament.
Then he goes to Egypt, where right now he's partied

(16:58):
to a Middle East peace crist friends with the Arab partners,
all building, by the way, on the foundations he put
in place in the first term with the Abraham Accords,
and what he's doing now is building on that foundation
and building on his relationships that he is fostered, and

(17:19):
building on the fact that he brought both Israel and
Arab countries together to say, you know what, we need
to address this. We need to address this fully and
with focus. And they did, and the Arab countries said,
you got to get your stuff together to Hamas too.

(17:41):
So maybe we're at a point where Trump is going
to be the guy who can bring about something remarkable.

Speaker 2 (17:51):
That is Hamas to.

Speaker 1 (17:53):
Be disarmed and eradicated and something different to happen. Now,
maybe that's just poppycock, as the Brits would say, maybe
that's something that is just too much wishful think. Wishful thinking.
I call it cautious optimism to say, if you actually
look at the building blocks, the pieces that have been

(18:16):
put in place over the years, and especially this remarkable
achievement now and how he's playing this out, I think
it is justification for having that cautious optimism to say,
maybe there's something different here. I remember in Oh gosh,

(18:40):
was it Star Trek for the voyage home? Let me
nerd out for just a moment. Spock says to Kirk,
there's an old Vulcan proverb. Only Nixon could go to China. Yes,
because the Vulcans are going to have that an alien
species is.

Speaker 2 (18:56):
Going to have that proverb.

Speaker 1 (18:59):
But maybe it's only Trump can go to the Middle
East and bring about a lasting peace. I mean, say
what you will about a lot of the things. Like
I said before, I'm a massive critic on trade.

Speaker 2 (19:12):
We're going to get to that and I think justifiably so.

Speaker 1 (19:17):
And there's big problems there and there are other things
we can agree or disagree with Trump on there's certainly
a lot of consternation about some of this stuff domestically,
But when we look at this aspect of the foreign affairs,
really striking, really impactful.

Speaker 2 (19:36):
I don't know, good.

Speaker 1 (19:38):
This text coming in Kwa come in spirit health text line.
Good that there is a deal at present, but it's
not worth spit if both sides don't stick to it.
Believe it when I see it, which won't be for years. Yeah,
I think that's fair. Absolutely. We can't be looking at

(19:59):
this and saying, oh my god. Trump achieved peace in
the Middle East. He achieved a peace deal, and he
is laying the groundwork for something more significant. The summit
that he's got right now is on Gaz's future. This
is not a oh wonderful we achieved a ceasefire, the
war is over, let's go home. He's already doing the

(20:22):
hard work of meeting with the Arab leaders, getting together
and saying what can we do to make this last?
That's never been done before. Nobody else could bring people
to the table like this. And it's not just because

(20:44):
Trump is Trump. It's because they've been so smart in
how they've approached this since he took office, And I'll
give you one reminder as we shift gears. When Trump
took office, it was in spring of twenty seventeen that
his very first visit to any foreign country was to

(21:06):
Saudi Arabia, where in Riod he gave a momentous speech
where he condemned terrorism and to the faces of the
Arab leaders he said, drive them out. That set the
tone for everything, and he met with him and had
these conversations, and the Abraham Accords came about. So when

(21:32):
I get text from listeners asking how many times this
has been accomplished before, I think this is very different
from the end to conflict that we've seen between Israel
and Hamas or Israel and Hezbollah in.

Speaker 2 (21:46):
The past, and hopefully it holds. I don't know.

Speaker 1 (21:51):
I don't have a crystal ball, and Hamas is evil,
it is in their charter to eradicate Israel. I'm only
saying that there is cause for optimism in a way
that we haven't had before.

Speaker 2 (22:04):
And we'll see what happens.

Speaker 1 (22:05):
It could totally literally blow up and smoke hopefully not hopefully,
the way that he's playing this and the strategy is
much more effective than that. We shall see time will
indeed tell once again. Jimmy Singing Berger in for Ross Kaminski.

(22:27):
Jd Vance was on the Sunday Show circuit yesterday and
there were several different things. He stood the pot a
little bit and had several different exchanges that are noteworthy.

Speaker 2 (22:43):
Speaking of the Middle East.

Speaker 1 (22:44):
By the way, he did get asked about the Katari
bass or the whatever's happening where they're setting up an
Idaho at an air Force base, a little sort of
air force shop of their own, and this is when
he said, I don't think this was adequate.

Speaker 5 (23:01):
This is largely a fake story. We continue to have
with countries that we work with. We have relationships where
sometimes their pilots work on our on our basis, sometimes
that we train together, sometimes we work together in other ways.
They're reporting that somehow there is going to be a
Katari base on United States soil. That's just not true.

(23:21):
We are continuing to work with a number of our
Arabs or our Arab friends to ensure that we are
able to enforce this piece. But we're not going to
let a foreign country have an actual base on American soil.
So there's a bit of misreporting on that, as there often.

Speaker 1 (23:35):
Is as you know, Maria, so tell us a little
more about what is actually happening to the extent you can. Okay,
so there's not going to be a base, good, but
what will it be.

Speaker 2 (23:46):
Cutter is a.

Speaker 1 (23:47):
Leading sponsor, state sponsor of terrorism. We have accepted a
massive jet from them, but we all did use them,
rely on them to help broker the deal with Israel
and Hamas. Maybe this is being used as a carrot

(24:10):
to make Cutter seem more important in certain ways, to
get them to play ball in the long term plans
and to back off on the terrorism. I don't know.
Maybe it's happening a little too quick. I don't feel
comfortable with it. I want more of an explanation on
Cutter and what's happening with this notion of whether there's
an air force.

Speaker 2 (24:30):
Base for them or not.

Speaker 1 (24:33):
And unfortunately he didn't provide an answer to that question
that was I think concrete enough.

Speaker 2 (24:41):
Then the Vice President, this.

Speaker 1 (24:43):
One, I think, was on NBC News where he was
pressed on the possible use of the Insurrection Act to
allow the military to help engage in law enforcement in
some of these cities beleaguered by crime. Of course, the
Insurrection Act has not been used since nineteen ninety two

(25:06):
with the La riots, the Rodney King riots with President
George HW. Bush, But the law does go back to
the year eighteen o seven. Here's a little bit of
avance answering that question.

Speaker 5 (25:19):
Well, the president's looking at all of his options right now.
He hasn't felt he needed to. But we have to remember,
why are we talking about this, Kristen, Because crime has
gotten out of control in our cities, because our ice agents,
the people who are enforcing our immigration laws, have faced
a one thousand percent increase in violent attacks against them.
We have people right now who are going out there,
who are doing the job the President asked them to do,

(25:41):
who are enforcing our immigration laws. They're being assaulted, they're
being beaten, they're being shot at. The problem here is
not the Insurrection Act or whether we actually invoke.

Speaker 6 (25:50):
It or not.

Speaker 5 (25:51):
The problem is the fact that the entire media in
this country, secheered on by a few far left lunatics,
have made it okay to tee off on American law enforcement.
We cannot accept that in the United States of America.
We want everybody, black or white, Richard Port to be
safe in the United States of America, but to do that,
we have to empower our law enforcementations.

Speaker 6 (26:12):
That's what we're talking about doing.

Speaker 1 (26:14):
So when President Trump sent National guardsmen to LA earlier
this year, which can you believe that was just earlier
this year?

Speaker 2 (26:23):
With so much has happened, Sometimes I think things.

Speaker 1 (26:26):
Were last year or two years ago, because so much
happens with Trump in a short span of time that
you forget the passage of time and how much time
has really passed.

Speaker 2 (26:38):
But I digress.

Speaker 1 (26:40):
When Trump sent National guardsmen to Los Angeles, that was
really just to protect federal building. It was not to
engage them in any sort of law enforcement action.

Speaker 2 (26:51):
And I supported that.

Speaker 1 (26:53):
Now a judge disagreed with me, and it didn't work
out legally for Trump in that particular instance.

Speaker 2 (27:02):
But I thought it.

Speaker 1 (27:04):
Was reasonable given the chaos happening in LA at the time,
given how bad things were, given the need for more
protection of federal properties and so forth, and for the
presence of National Guard to hopefully tamp things down.

Speaker 2 (27:22):
This idea, though, of invoking.

Speaker 1 (27:24):
The Insurrection Act, for the military to get involved in
law enforcement actions more directly in American cities and sovereign states,
and in some instances, what I think is any pulling
National guardsmen from Texas to go into Illinois.

Speaker 2 (27:45):
That's the.

Speaker 1 (27:47):
Move that he's doing, because Pritzker, the governor of Illinois,
who wants to be President of the United States, says, no,
I'm not going to use my National Guard at all.
Same thing in Oregon with Portland. I get the mentality

(28:08):
there why you want to crack down. But two thoughts
that concern me. One, we do have sovereignty to the states,
and the idea that the federal government, the all knowing,
all powerful federal government, can just circumvent the wishes of
a governor and the state and say, well, we're gonna
send another state's National Guard to use them to help

(28:33):
enforce the law and crack down on crime in your
area that you aren't doing when you are the local
government held accountable to the people in your state or
your city.

Speaker 2 (28:47):
I think that is overstepping.

Speaker 1 (28:51):
And it concerns me about the precedent that set the
Feds being able to say under Trump, let's do this,
we could do this, we could take the action, and
then what happens for a future president making a determination,
And quite frankly, it's not like things are as they
were in twenty twenty when Trump was president, then there

(29:12):
might have been more cause for use to the military.
It Remember Chaz what was it called, the Chaz region
of Portland, and just how bad it really was.

Speaker 2 (29:29):
I'm looking that up.

Speaker 1 (29:30):
Capitol Hill occupied protest, it was the chop and then
the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone Chaz and that was Seattle.
Thank you Shannon for correcting me as well. I'm see
here Seattle, not Portland Seattle, although Portland was absolutely crazy too,
it was a mess. So that was an instance when

(29:53):
Trump was president, by the way, when maybe there was
some cause to call in the military and say we're
going to something, because literally they had these zones that
were taken over, But he didn't do that then. And
in this instance, crime is bad in those cities, just
as it's bad here in Denver, but it isn't that

(30:15):
bad in comparison to what it was during his first term.

Speaker 2 (30:18):
And to say we're going to bring in.

Speaker 1 (30:20):
The military to enforce law and order makes me very
uneasy when we're talking about general crime situation, not something
as extravagant, if that's the right word, as chaotic, as
dangerous as we saw then in twenty twenty or even
in Los Angeles earlier this year, although then, of course,

(30:43):
there was much more restrained mission for the military. I
don't think Vance completely answered that. He was pressed a
little more on the imminence of this thing.

Speaker 6 (30:56):
Is there a rebellion here? That's what would trigger an
insurrection act? Is it imminent?

Speaker 5 (31:02):
Christen crime is down in Chicago and Portland often because
they're so overwhelmed at the local level they're not even
keeping the statistics properly.

Speaker 6 (31:10):
Just a couple of weeks ago, we had.

Speaker 5 (31:11):
An ICE office get shot at by a far left
assassin who was trying to kill our law enforcement officers.
He fortunately didn't kill law enforcement officers, he did kill
some other innocent people in the process. We cannot allow
the far left in this country to tee off on
our law enforcement officers. We've got to do something about it.
And that's all the president's talking about here.

Speaker 1 (31:32):
If that is it, if it's limited to we're going
to provide additional protection for our ICE agents at forced
in the law, what have you. I could see that
it just depends. You need to have the limitations. You
need to have the ground rules very clear. But that's
if you're even going to that extent You've got to

(31:53):
be very careful to get to that extent. Now, there
was one other exchange with George Stefanopolis on ABC News.
Remember Stephanopolis, of course, was the top guy in the
Clinton white House back in the nineties. Never forget that,
and he was pressing JD. Vance on the borders are

(32:17):
Tom Homan and this notion of him accepting a fifty
thousand dollars bribe to hopefully provide people jobs when he
would get back into the Trump white House if Trump won.
Here's a piece of that where Vance sort of pivots,
and I do think it's an effective strategy and how
he pivots. But it gets to something else that happened

(32:38):
from Stephanopolis that really was just I can't.

Speaker 7 (32:43):
Stand what was caught on the tape you're saying right now,
you don't know whether or not he kept that money.

Speaker 5 (32:50):
I don't know what tape you're referring to, George. I
saw media reports that Tom Homan accepted a bribe.

Speaker 6 (32:56):
There's no evidence of that.

Speaker 5 (32:57):
And here's George, why fewer and fewer people watch your
program and why you're losing credibility because you're talking for
now five minutes with the Vice President of the United
States about this story regarding Tom Holme and a story
that I've read about, but I don't even know the
video that you're talking about. Meanwhile, low income women can't
get food because the Democrats and Chuck Schumer have shut

(33:18):
down the government.

Speaker 6 (33:19):
Right now, we're trying.

Speaker 5 (33:20):
To figure out how to pay our troops because Chuck
Schumer has shut down the government. You're focused on a
bogus story. You're insinuating criminal wrongdoing against a guy who
has done nothing wrong, instead of focusing on the fact
that our country is struggling because our government's shut down.

Speaker 6 (33:36):
Let's talk about the real issues, George.

Speaker 5 (33:38):
I think the American people would benefit much more from
that than from you going down some weird left wing
rabbit hole where the facts clearly show that Tom Holman
didn't engage in any criminal wrongdoing.

Speaker 1 (33:48):
And honestly, that as an example of VANCE being very
effective with messaging pivoting, saying, look, we're spending five minutes
on Tom home and when we have all these other
significant issues for you to ask me about out and
there's no evidence that Tom Holman, even if he got
this fifty thousand dollars before Trump won, that he actually
did anything. He's purported to tell FBI agents undercover that

(34:12):
he was going to do so. I mean, spending five
minutes with the Vice president on that seems absurd. Well,
then this happened to end the interview, and I do
think Vance handled that very well.

Speaker 7 (34:24):
It's not a weird left wing rabbit hole. I didn't
insinuate anything. I asked you whether Tom Holman accepted fifty
thousand dollars, as was heard on an audio tape recorded
by the FBI in September twenty twenty four, and you
did not answer the question.

Speaker 2 (34:36):
Thank you for your time.

Speaker 6 (34:37):
This morning till he said that I biled up.

Speaker 2 (34:40):
Next We'll be right back.

Speaker 1 (34:41):
What the hell was that You end the interview with
the vice president of the United States, You do your
little correction sort of thing, and then he tries to
speak up and you cut him off.

Speaker 2 (34:56):
The Vice President of.

Speaker 1 (34:56):
The United States, Like, oh, what gives you the Obviously
you have the right, it's your shell, But what gives
you the sense that that's the right thing to do?
Talk about absurd just not the way to handle that,
plain and simple. I'm Jimmy sang Itberger filling in for

(35:19):
Ros Kaminski. Our number one is under wraps. Two more
hours up ahead as we continue on KOA, how you doing, Dragon,
good buddy and yourself and oh I've been getting over
a dog gone cold, but I'm.

Speaker 2 (35:30):
Doing all right.

Speaker 1 (35:31):
And there's just one of the things about this era.
And you know this even better than me because you're
in the studio every day, But there is.

Speaker 2 (35:43):
No shortage of topics to talk about.

Speaker 1 (35:45):
You don't have to stretch to figure out what am
I going to discuss today.

Speaker 8 (35:50):
What was the old proverb maybe live in interesting times?

Speaker 1 (35:55):
It has absolutely come true whenever Trump is president, and
quite frankly, in the intervening four years in between his
two terms, it has also been very interesting times. And
I look at it and I think, some days, can
we calm it down?

Speaker 2 (36:14):
But no, you can't. Now, today's some good news.

Speaker 1 (36:18):
All the hostages who are alive are back from the
custody of Hamas. They have been freed. And President Trump
spoke to Israel's parliament and he spoke He's now at
a summit in Egypt to figure out what's gonna happen
with guys. After We're gonna talk about that more again

(36:38):
later on in the program, but it is nice to
have some good news when you've had, especially in the
case of this war, two years of bad news of death,
of destruction. Of course, the question is will it hold
and all of that. We'll get to that more later
on in the program. But every once in a while,

(37:00):
it's nice to be able to have some good news
to report, isn't it? Dragon love it now?

Speaker 2 (37:06):
Is it good news to report that you and I
are on the air together?

Speaker 8 (37:09):
Always?

Speaker 2 (37:10):
I think it's excellent news.

Speaker 1 (37:11):
In fact, it is some of the best news I've
had in a very long time. Not better than this news,
with the pristages being of course, that's slightly that's just
ever so slightly okay, dramatically better, but this is still
still some really good news. And one of the things

(37:33):
to me that I always find really interesting is when
you have the different perspectives from the talking heads on
issues going on in the country, and you have the
varying takes on well, for example, this is Molly Hemingway
on the peace process.

Speaker 9 (37:53):
But it just is interesting that we so often have
presidents who seem to focus on wars that they've entered
or how they're waging war, and this president really seems
to have a hunger for peace and brags about how
many peace treaties he can get signed and how many
peaceful arrangements can happen.

Speaker 2 (38:09):
And it's a big difference.

Speaker 1 (38:10):
Sure, that's all well and good, and I agree, it's
pretty striking to see that he literally is saying, well, now,
I think I can say I'm eight for eight. Okay, well,
keep the score, keep the score. But then Scotus Blog,
former Trump official in the Department of Justice Sarah Isker

(38:34):
noted something about the difference is in the Department of
Justice between Trump's first and second term.

Speaker 10 (38:42):
There were very different people in office during the first
term than in this term. I think that's the big difference.
I don't think Donald Trump has changed. I think the
personnel in the Department of Justice has changed.

Speaker 6 (38:52):
In the first.

Speaker 10 (38:52):
Term, there was really a united front about the role
of the Department of Justice and the purpose of the
rule of law, telling the President this is not what
the Department of Justice will do. Obviously, I think there's
a lot more fractures in this Department of Justice. There's
a lot different feeling of what the role is now.
What you will hear from Maga, what you will hear
from those people in the Department of Justice. Is this

(39:15):
is what deterrence theory is about. When you're playing a
cooperative game and the other side defects, in this case
the Democrats, with the Alvin Bragg prosecution as the biggest example,
then you hit them back disproportionately to create that deterrence.
I think the problem they will find is that actually
that was incredibly unpopular for Democrats. When you asked who

(39:35):
is a bigger threat to democracy in the run up
to this last election, they said Democrats.

Speaker 7 (39:39):
If I'm wearying credit, you're saying that you, and more importantly,
the Attorney General would have tried to stop it.

Speaker 10 (39:44):
I think you saw many times during the first administration
that people at the Department of Justice acted very differently,
offered to resign, and the President interestingly didn't take them
up on that. This time he is.

Speaker 1 (39:55):
I think that wasn't just normal talking head chatter. That
was actually an informative bit of discourse there.

Speaker 2 (40:01):
I think she's got a point that the Trump.

Speaker 1 (40:05):
Administration, they're looking at this as deterrence. Let's amplify it.
So now we're gonna take what they did and we're
gonna make it even bigger. The problem is you're making
the precedent even worse, because then when the Democrats come in,
they're gonna do even more and it's gonna be even worse.
And you've got to be really careful and judicious about
the way in which you were using your judicial authority

(40:29):
or the Department of Justice and its authority to move
ahead with cases, various criminal cases and so forth.

Speaker 2 (40:36):
Sometimes you're gonna get on things that are right.

Speaker 1 (40:39):
Other times you're gonna hit on things that maybe you
should have stepped back on.

Speaker 2 (40:44):
That which is which in specific instances.

Speaker 1 (40:47):
That's for another discussion, but I found it really interesting
that she was saying.

Speaker 2 (40:53):
That when you.

Speaker 1 (40:54):
Poll people about who was sort of basically more authoritarian,
is what it comes down to. Prior to Trump getting
reelected for this second non consecutive term, and people were
saying the Democrats, the Democrats, and that's because they overplayed
their hand, because they used the DOJ to go after
Trump and some of his allies. They set that up,

(41:20):
and the American people rejected it and said, we.

Speaker 2 (41:22):
Don't like this.

Speaker 1 (41:24):
Now, the funny irony is the Democrats now saying, oh
my gosh, look at Trump. He's so authoritarian and he's
doing all this stuff for the Department of Justice that
he shouldn't do. He may be doing it a bit
more than Democrats did, but you can't put your head
in the sand and act like the Democrats didn't also

(41:44):
do political targeting with their cases and the Justice Department,
because without a doubt they did and certainly gave the
impression to the American people targeting Trump in certain ways
and some of his allies. The whole thing is a
mess where I would like a reserved president in Trump,
to say, a reserved president in Trump, but for him to.

Speaker 2 (42:09):
Just pull back a little bit.

Speaker 1 (42:11):
But she did note I think properly that people in
this administration are much more aggressive than.

Speaker 2 (42:17):
In the first administration. This is not Trump's first term.

Speaker 1 (42:22):
Is very different term, and in some ways I like
the brash news and pushing the envelope a little bit
on some things, but then they're so overboard on some
of the other stuff, like the tariffs. I keep teasing
that I'm going to be getting to tariffs and trained
a little bit. Maybe we'll do that in the next segment.
We'll see, But without a doubt, he has breached the

(42:44):
presidential authority. Is not the president's authority to do what
he's done on tariffs and with the trade war and
so forth. And that's just one example, and there are
others where they're sort of flaunting, but then the court

(43:04):
makes the decision and guess what they've been abiding by
those decisions. They might find workarounds, but Biden did too,
Obama did too. We have more of an imperial presidency
because of many decades of increasing power in the president.

(43:25):
Trump is just the latest culmination of that. And to
say he singularly breaking norms, I think denies the reality
that with each passing presidency we've had more breaking of
the norms, if you will, building on the authority of
the president. With more authority of the president, so on

(43:45):
and so forth. Trump's just very brash in his rhetoric,
and so it's in your face a lot more. He's
willing to exercise it in a way that seems more brazen,
but he's really just building on what's been late out
for him. That's not an excuse, that's an explanation. All
of these presidencies have been egregious in terms of the

(44:09):
expansion of presidential authority.

Speaker 2 (44:12):
We need to wind it back.

Speaker 1 (44:14):
Unfortunately, Congress has been unwilling forever to do that. The
park's on all the houses in that regard. I'm Jimmy
Singenberger in four Ross Kaminski. We got more ahead on KOA.

Speaker 6 (44:31):
Sports.

Speaker 11 (44:33):
I got a note from a listener yesterday. She's actually
driving from some other part of the state once a
week for a little while to go to Region Revolution
and her goal is.

Speaker 1 (44:44):
So I have to drag it. Just that you got
to talk to Haris. You've been given teasing it. I
talked earlier. I mean when I dropped the little.

Speaker 6 (44:55):
People.

Speaker 2 (44:56):
It's so interesting when you.

Speaker 1 (45:00):
Give Trump credit for something, or you compliment him, or
you compliment Vance or defend Vance, and then you criticize them.
If somebody says you're drinking the kool aid, and I'm like,
which kool aid am I drinking?

Speaker 2 (45:12):
Dragon, I don't know what they're referring.

Speaker 1 (45:14):
To, exactly exactly which one.

Speaker 2 (45:20):
So JD.

Speaker 1 (45:22):
Vance, the Vice President was yesterday on what I think
this one? I don't know which show was. Oh, this
one was on with Maria Bartiromo on Fox News, and
he was giving an explanation for why there's a definition
of a national emergency in the China trade war. That

(45:46):
justifies Trump's tariffs in that regard.

Speaker 12 (45:48):
Will you have coming up a number of lawsuits.

Speaker 2 (45:52):
Wrong clip. Here we go.

Speaker 5 (45:54):
The fact that the People's Republic of China, the fact
that they have so much control over critical supply in
the United States of America, that is the definition of
a national emergency. The President has taken very decisive action
to correct that problem over.

Speaker 6 (46:08):
The last eight months.

Speaker 5 (46:10):
But unless we have access to this teriff authority, it's
going to be very hard to negotiate with China, and
it's going to be very.

Speaker 6 (46:16):
Hard for us to reshore some.

Speaker 5 (46:18):
Of these critical supplies and goods that we absolutely need
for our own economy.

Speaker 1 (46:22):
And he went on to talk about some of the
goals and the delicate dance.

Speaker 6 (46:27):
It's not going to happen in eight months.

Speaker 5 (46:29):
It's going to happen in some cases through negotiation, in
some cases through bringing some of this critical supply back
to the United States of America. But the President is
committing to protecting America's economic livelihoods but also making us
more self sufficient, and we've got to do both of.

Speaker 6 (46:43):
Those things at the same time.

Speaker 5 (46:45):
I'll be honest with you, Maria, It's going to be
a delicate dance, and a lot of it is going
to depend on how the Chinese respond. If they respond
in a highly aggressive manner, I guarantee you that President
of the United States has far more cards than the
people Republic of China. If, however, they're willing to be reasonable,
then Donald Trump is always to be was always willing

(47:06):
to be a reasonable negotiator. We're going to find out
a lot in the weeks to come about whether China
wants to start a trade war with us or whether
they actually want to be reasonable.

Speaker 1 (47:16):
Wait a second, I thought we were already in a
trade war, and I thought President Trump started the trade
war by saying we're slapping these tariffs, and then you
have the escalations and now it's one hundred percent. But
then he's like, well, I'm not sure if I'm going
to implement these it's November first, and he's kind of
giving a little bit of wishy washiness to it, which

(47:36):
again injects some uncertainty into the markets. I mean, one
of the big problems with the rare earth mineral situation
is that we.

Speaker 2 (47:43):
Have a nimby problem. Not in my backyard.

Speaker 1 (47:47):
Americans don't want to have the toxic refining that needs
to happen in our backyards. I mean a lot of
times you have massive pushback and the oil and gas
industry claiming nimbi.

Speaker 2 (48:02):
Same thing with nuclear power.

Speaker 1 (48:04):
It's the cleanest energy we could be looking for to
power multitudes of homes, and you have Americans that are like,
oh no, not in my backyard. It's a similar kind
of thing with rare earth minerals. And that's the basis
for the national emergency to then say we're gonna tearff
everything and do all of this and take on the

(48:25):
authority under a national emergency to unilaterally put in place tariffs.
Even if Trump was properly taking authority delegated to him,
that would still be unconstitutional because Article one of the
Constitution lays out that one of the powers of the
US Congress, as the legislative branch, is to put in

(48:49):
place any terriffs. Trump cannot be any president cannot be
delegated authority to unilaterally, at a whim anything like that,
take it upon themselves to put in place tariffs like this.
That's not constitutional. It's the violation of the non delegation doctrine.
And hopefully the Supreme Court taking up this case does

(49:11):
the right thing. Jimmy Sangenberger in for Ross Kaminski. Syndicated
columnist Ruben Navarette will join us on the other side,
talking about the peace process in the Middle East and
more as we continue koa momentous day in history, because
we do have the return of all of the surviving

(49:33):
hostages still alive from Hamas's custody back to Israel. President
Trump overnight here in the US speaking to Israel's parliament
for about an hour. I caught around the first twenty
minutes of it, and here's a taste of the enthusiastic

(49:53):
address he brought to Israel.

Speaker 3 (49:56):
To two harrowing years and darkness and captivity, twenty courageous
hostages are returning to the glorious embrace of their families.
And it is glorious. Twenty eight more precious loved ones
are coming home at last to rest in this sacred
soil for all of time, and after so many years

(50:20):
of unceasing war and endless danger. Today the skies are calm,
the guns are silent, the sirens are still, and the
sun rises on a holy land that is finally at peace,
a land and a region that will live, God willing
in peace for all eternity.

Speaker 1 (50:43):
Now the president is at a peace summit in Egypt.
I think some thirty five world leaders invited that number
attending the peace conference. Everyone invited being there, signing the
gods a ceasefire deal, bringing together other countries in this
than just Israel and the Palestinians, particularly Hamas. But how

(51:09):
optimistic should we be at this moment? Let's break it
all down with longtime syndicated columnist Ruben averet, A, host
of the Ruben in the Center podcast. Then averret A
nation on substack where he has his conversations and regular
newsletter articles and more. Ruben, welcome back to Koa, my friend, did.

Speaker 13 (51:30):
Jimmy great to be with you again.

Speaker 1 (51:31):
Thanks, This is a historic day. Let's start there with
your thoughts on the positive side of what we are seeing.
When we have twenty hostages returned and an end to
the fighting at least for now, you.

Speaker 13 (51:47):
Know, families reunited, people able to go home again. The idea,
Seeing that the images of parents reuniting with children after
two years they'd never given up hope, it's impossible not
to feel relief and joy and so much happiness for
those families. So I think there's a lot of positive there.

(52:08):
I think the apprehension comes from what's next, what's tomorrow.
Today should be about celebration, where there's tomorrow and tomorrow
brings lots of unanswered questions about the future security of
the region, what guarantees to Israelis have if this won't
happen again. And in fact, while people are talking about
disarming Hamas, is that even a possibility of whatever really happened?

Speaker 1 (52:30):
And that is the question everybody's asking, and I have
some I'm sort of going back and forth on this
a little bit, Reuben, because on the one hand, it's
Hamas they have in their charter, the affirmation that they
are all about eradicating Israel from the face of the earth.
But at the same time, we do have an involvement

(52:53):
with Trump of the Middle Eastern countries, other Arab countries
that are supportive of the Palestinians, that are involved in
this process in a way that I'm not sure we've
seen quite to this extent before. And if he continues
to work diplomatically in this way, do you think that
could be helpful to getting things in the direction that

(53:16):
will be necessary in order to have some kind of
long term piece.

Speaker 13 (53:20):
Well, you said it, if, and so to give all
creds President Trump. He has brought a unique kind of
Trumpian diplomacy to the region that probably doesn't work anywhere
else but seems to work there. You know, he speaks
the language of that chaotic region, a chaotic president, a
chaotic region. And I think it's silly for the liberal
media to try to give credit beyond this to the

(53:42):
Biden administration, and talking to former members of the bid administration,
all credits to Trump. This is his victory. Having said that,
you said it if. I think the President has shown
in the past an incredibly short attention span for things
like this, and he tends to speak in absolute terms.
It's crazy, ridiculous to say, you know, we brought piece
to the Middle East and at least is a big place,

(54:04):
a complicated and chaotic place. Yeah, and I don't think
anybody believes that this is peace in the Middle East.
This is a good day with a good victory. But
I think the president's being overly optimistic, overly and plistic.
And you know, I don't think Trump will be there
in a week or in a month, six months, will
be on to something else. And everybody I've heard from
this morning all the experts say this is going to
be a long, long journey. And what do we know

(54:25):
our president Jimman, he's not good at long, long journeys.

Speaker 1 (54:28):
I don't know if that's entirely something I would agree
with you on Rubin neverritting.

Speaker 2 (54:32):
And here's why.

Speaker 1 (54:34):
In his first term, President Trump went overseas to riadd
Saudi Arabia as his very first overseas visit, he met
with the King of Saudi Arabia, he spoke in a
barnstorming address where he called out terrorism and said push
them out and so forth, as his first address, laying
the groundworks then for the Abraham Accords, which was such

(54:55):
a big plank throughout his first term. And my view
is that his second term in all the Middle Eastern
policy is more than anything built around expanding the Abraham
Accords and resolving this war in Gaza and getting something
long term would seem to be a big part.

Speaker 2 (55:14):
In making that happen.

Speaker 1 (55:16):
And so we have this going back to twenty seventeen
when he first took office.

Speaker 2 (55:21):
I think he actually has some more.

Speaker 1 (55:23):
Long term visions for the Middle East, and maybe that's
because of some of the people that he surrounded himself with,
maybe because it's because of the reputation of the Abraham Accords,
but I at least think that there's some cause to
think he's going to be focused on this, perhaps throughout
the rest of his term.

Speaker 13 (55:41):
So I take your point, And one of the big
piece of evidence that bolsters your point is the involvement
of Jared Kushner, the President's son in law, Yes, and
the fact that you know, as long as he's in
the President's life that this is going to be an
issue that is important to Jared and important to the President.
What I would offer the counterpoint is what happened to
the complim between Russia and Ukraine. If you track where

(56:03):
the president has been with regards to Russia and Ukraine,
he's all over the map. He's been all over the map,
and there are moments where he seems to be very
close to Russia, very far from Russia, at other moments
close to Ukraine, apartment from Ukraine. And now the general
sense that I and others have is that he thought
this was so much more complicated to get a peace
deal between Russia and Ukraine. He eventually just gave up.
After the Alaska Summit focused all his attention on the

(56:25):
Middle East. So if you're looking at them the point
of view of the Abraham Accords, you can make the
point that this is the president who can play the
long game. But if you're looking at it from Kiev
and from Ukraine, not so much. Not so much. This
is a president who who says something moved on to
something else. Ten minutes ago, he was fighting inflation, he
was going to cure inflation, he was going to get
rid of it. Now we never hear the eyeword from him.

(56:47):
We never hear about inflation. The president likes victory, doesn't
like defeat, doesn't like step backs, and when he gets
a step back, he gets frustrated, and then he gets distracted.

Speaker 2 (56:58):
Yeah, I do think there's a lot of true to that.

Speaker 1 (57:00):
Particularly Russia and Ukraine is a great example. I wonder
if though, he was trying to approach Putin in a
certain way and realized it was much more frustrating, and
then he started talking tougher because of a recognition that, okay,
the attempt to get Putin to play ball by being

(57:22):
nice isn't working. And I mean, you see the tougher
rhetoric of late on Ukraine. Do you think that this
notion that Trump has He says, now, I'm eight for eight.

Speaker 2 (57:33):
He's keeping track of peace deals.

Speaker 1 (57:35):
In fact, I want you to respond in this context,
Molly Hemingway saying this and Fox.

Speaker 9 (57:39):
But it's just interesting that we so often have presidents
who seem to focus on wars that they've entered or
how they're waging war, and this president really seems to
have a hunger for peace and brags about how many
peace treaties he can get signed and how many peaceful
arrangements can happen.

Speaker 2 (57:55):
And it's a big difference.

Speaker 1 (57:56):
Could he look at Russia and Ukraine as another one
on the scoreboard of peace that might incentivize him to
get a deal?

Speaker 13 (58:03):
Why didn't we need to go back to a smidch
s orre we talk about the president.

Speaker 1 (58:13):
Seem to have lost Ruben Nevarette or at least that
connection for just a moment.

Speaker 2 (58:17):
We'll get him back again.

Speaker 1 (58:19):
He is syndicated columnists as we talk about what's happening
in the Middle East and Russia Ukraine. I mean, this
is a presidency that's supposed to be all about peace,
that is in their mind on the foreign policy stage,
setting that standard of we don't actually want war, although

(58:39):
they've changed the department name to Department of War from
Department of Defense. But that's because we want to deter
war and we want to end war as quickly. And
that's what the Trump administration is all about, is ending
wars and bringing about peace. We have Ruben Nevarette back
with us. Ruben, please pick up where you were so

(59:00):
just quickly.

Speaker 13 (59:00):
I was just saying that as a member of the
baby boom generation, it's been clear as you watch President
Trump for the last ten years, this is somebody who
doesn't like war, who creates peace, who doesn't like conflict,
doesn't want foreign entanglements. And I think it comes from
his upbringing and it comes from his roots in that generation.
Having said that, we have to be careful with this
eight for eight business. If you can look at one
of the eight cases is the president likes to say

(59:22):
credit for ending the war between India and Pakistan. That's
a stretch. Okay, you can oversell this stuff and maybe
just overly cynical and pessimistic, but there are a lot
of people, got a lot of points on that board
of conflicts that are not fixed with a band aid
stuck there. Those two countries still don't like you to,
don't trust each other. They're going to come back and

(59:42):
fight again, and so I think that's what we have
to really think about. It gets back why I said
about the Middle East. It's easy to say, well, yo,
we fix the Middle East. Well that was easy, right.
The only problem is this is not an area that
is easily fixable. You now have a generation of Israelis
who hate Palestinians, and not just hate Hama with desification,
but have a resentment and distrust with the Palestinian people

(01:00:04):
because it was Palestinian quote civilians who hit the hostages
in their homes right, and who cheered the attack of
ten seven. In the other direction, you have people coming
back to Gaza. The place has been leveled. There is
no more Gaza. They hate the Israelis and so over
that that hate and that thirst revengeance is going to
last to me a long long time. I don't care

(01:00:24):
what the President says about mission accomplished. Okay, a big
banner overhead mentioned accomplished. Not so quick, not so fast.

Speaker 1 (01:00:32):
Irvin never read a joining us on the program. I
do want to shift gears. We've just got a few
minutes left with you. Another aspect on the foreign affairs
stage has to do with trade, and I think I
got about this part in a clip from JD Vance yesterday.

Speaker 2 (01:00:46):
We'll see if I got the right starting point.

Speaker 1 (01:00:48):
But take a listen to a piece of him discussing
China and trade.

Speaker 5 (01:00:52):
Well, then Donald Trump is always to be was always
willing to be a reasonable negotiator. We're going to find
out a lot in the weeks to come about whether
China wants to start a trade war with us or
whether they actually want to be reasonable.

Speaker 2 (01:01:04):
I don't know, Ruben.

Speaker 1 (01:01:05):
Last night checked President Trump started a trade war with
China that has consistently escalated.

Speaker 2 (01:01:10):
Andy's exercising power.

Speaker 1 (01:01:12):
That's now before the Supreme Court that I think is
going to rule against him on this. But what do
you make of the latest with regards to China one
hundred percent tariff in place on top of everything else
already in place November first, and all the rest.

Speaker 13 (01:01:27):
You know, Jadi's the slippery one, right, You caught that
I caught that it wasn't China started this war. You
could argue, as the president who started this war and
also declared war on Canada and other countries, friendly country, allies,
and the kid we have maybe over the Canadian thing,
but the Canadians are not over it. You know, they
clearly feel that they're a war with us. And so
this is, by farge, I mean, one of the weak

(01:01:47):
spots of the president's entire agenda and his record. The
fact that he handled the tariff so badly that he
put them on, took them off, put them on, took
them off, the fact that it was so erradic the
fact that at some point we had twenty different justifications
for putting on tariffs, including at one point is if
I don't like the leader you've chosen in this country,
you're not doing enough to back your president, I'm going

(01:02:09):
to come in and post tariffs. So using teriffs for
political reasons, you know, Milton Friedman, Ronald reag and other
spinning in their graves thinking this is not why conservatives,
you know, are thought to be good on economic issues.
And lastly the Democrats, that's how Rubon got to be
in the center. I really detest both parties at this time,
and I have for a long time. And the Democrats
are completely paralyzed because they support the tariffs. The unions

(01:02:31):
want the tariffs, and the Union's control the Democratic Party,
and so the Democrats can't hit the president on the
one spot where he should be hit. So it's a
broken government. This is why Ruben's in the center. I
don't trust any of them anymore.

Speaker 1 (01:02:44):
One last thing, Ruben, now rat and let's talk about
the possible use of the Insurrection Act. Here's one more
bit of JD Vance and the Sunday Shows yesterday.

Speaker 5 (01:02:53):
Is there a rebellion here, that's what would trigger an
Insurrection Act?

Speaker 6 (01:02:56):
Is it imminent?

Speaker 5 (01:03:00):
Christ crime is down in Chicago and Portland often because
they're so overwhelmed at the local level they're not even
keeping the statistics properly.

Speaker 6 (01:03:07):
Just a couple of weeks ago, we had.

Speaker 5 (01:03:09):
An ice office get shot at by a far left
assassin who was trying to kill our law enforcement officers.
He fortunately didn't kill law enforcement officers, he did kill
some other innocent people in the process. We cannot allow
the far left in this country to tee off on
our law enforcement officers. We've got to do something about it.
And that's all the president's talking about.

Speaker 1 (01:03:29):
When President Trump used the National Guard on a limited
basis earlier this year in Los Angeles, a judge struck
that down. Do you think that the Trump administration might
actually try to proceed with the Insurrection Act and say
Chicago or Portland?

Speaker 2 (01:03:51):
Looks like we've.

Speaker 1 (01:03:52):
Got that audio issue once more. Jimmy Sangenberger here with you,
Ruben Navarette, our guest.

Speaker 2 (01:03:58):
When we look at JD.

Speaker 1 (01:03:59):
Vans and his explanation here, I think he's right to
point out that you have this violence against federal officers
and so forth. But does that mean that you have
the fact remain or rather, does that mean that you
have the National Guard go into a city like this

(01:04:20):
and subvert the authority of the local or state officials.

Speaker 2 (01:04:27):
Rubin Averrede joining us again, Ruben, go ahead.

Speaker 13 (01:04:30):
Well, what I was saying was the founders went to
a great deal of trouble, and the courts of last
two and fift years have gone to a great deal
of trouble. Jimmy, to differentiate between what we call authority,
that the City of Chicago police department versus federal law enforcement,
the National Regular Army troops, they all have different roles
to play, and they're not interchangeable. They're not supposed to

(01:04:54):
be interchangeable. So that's been the problem all along, and
that's the problem with the Insurrection Act. It does look
like you said it in that direction. It's going to
be very, very complicated, dangerous people we have heard of.
Much of this will be declared unconstitutional. It's clearly where
he wants to go, but you know the constitution, the
two um and fifty years of tradition history says he
can't go there.

Speaker 2 (01:05:14):
We'll see what happens.

Speaker 1 (01:05:15):
Ruben never At a host of Ruben in the Center,
long time syndicated columnists. Thanks for joining us and offering
your perspective today.

Speaker 13 (01:05:23):
Jimmy, thank you you bet.

Speaker 1 (01:05:24):
Once again, Ruben never At a check about never At
a nation on substack. So we have some local news
that has broken this morning. It's something I'm writing about
for what will be a Wednesday column in the Denver Gazette.
News came out late last week, originally publicized by jeff

(01:05:49):
co Kids First, about a candidate in Jefferson County running
for the school board there who had a juvenile what
he admitted to on a recording a deferred adjudication, as
how he put it, for what was a sexual abuse

(01:06:16):
charges as a child as a juvenile. This from a
statement from the Jefferson County Education Association, which had backed
candidate Michael Yokum, who I believe is twenty six years old.
JCEA recently learned of a sealed court record from Michael Yoakum.

(01:06:36):
The issue did not come up in the questionnaire, interview
or the vetting process. In light of this information not
being disclosed to JCEA during the recommendation process, JCEA will
be withdrawing their recommendation of Michael Yokum. I will say

(01:06:58):
Rocky Mountain Voice is the one bit of news coverage
that I have seen on this story yet. I've been
working on it for my column schedule. Going to be
doing Wednesday instead of Tuesday to talk about this. Or
Rockymountain Voice dot com. You can go there. They have
a good report that lays out some of the issues
involved in this.

Speaker 2 (01:07:17):
Very difficult story, very difficult story.

Speaker 1 (01:07:21):
The Union goes on to say, though, and I think
this is a real dig at Jeffco Kids First, which
has been such a staunch advocate for issues of this candidacy.
The problem with the candidacy is in this moment, the
sensitivity somebody can be rehabilitated from mistakes of their youth.

Speaker 2 (01:07:41):
What have you at this moment.

Speaker 1 (01:07:43):
We have a lot of problems in Jefferson County schools
with sexual abuse and all kinds of allegations and criminality.
We have the chief of schools who took his own
life at the end of last year for child pornography,
and the list goes on that Trust, you can't have

(01:08:04):
a school board member with a history as a juvenile
or otherwise.

Speaker 2 (01:08:10):
Of this just hang over the school board.

Speaker 1 (01:08:14):
And everything they do is they try to address issues
like this, but of course the teachers' union has to
get their dig in. One of the advocates for parents
and for safety of kids in light of all this,
jeff go kids first. This does not downplay the actions
of political extremists the Union rights who are.

Speaker 2 (01:08:32):
Trying to use a complicated.

Speaker 1 (01:08:34):
And traumatic event from over a decade ago to achieve
their own political outcomes. These harmful political tactics do nothing
to support our students, teachers or public schools. Please come on,

(01:08:56):
that's what you're doing. Adding in that political dig year
to say political extrements that are exploiting this. Now, there
is a significant problem in this district and you need
to resolve it, and Trust needs to be rebuilt, and
the fact that you're withdrawing your endorsement of this candidacy.

Speaker 2 (01:09:19):
Of a candidate for.

Speaker 1 (01:09:21):
The school board says a heck of a lot. Now,
good for them for withdrawing that candidacy, especially if they
didn't know about this, But I would like to know
about their vetting process. How do they actually delve into
these things to find out what's going on before they
make an endorsement and give a candidate that he did
hear eleven thousand dollars the Teachers' Union withdrawing their support

(01:09:44):
of candidate Michael Yoakum for the school board. I'll be
writing about this for Wednesday. We'll have more later in
the week as well. Got to run to a break.
Jimmy Sangenberger in for US commits Kian Kowa. Great to
be with you tomorrow as well for Ross and then Wednesday,
Thursday and Friday from noon to three for Mandy Connell.

Speaker 2 (01:10:05):
So you've got Jimmy.

Speaker 1 (01:10:06):
Singenberger in the chair all week here on KOA very
glad to be here and to keep tabs on the
latest of my columns podcasts when I fill in. Contacting
me by email twenty four seven three.

Speaker 2 (01:10:22):
Sixty five all the good stuff.

Speaker 1 (01:10:25):
There's one place to go to just that. It's my website,
Jimmy Sangenburger dot com. Keep in mind, there's no AI
or you in Singenburger.

Speaker 2 (01:10:35):
It's all ease all the time.

Speaker 1 (01:10:38):
Once you know that singing Burger is easy.

Speaker 2 (01:10:43):
Don't you love it when Dragon has it so.

Speaker 1 (01:10:45):
Down pat because it's easy.

Speaker 2 (01:10:49):
It is easy, isn't it once you learn it's all easy? Naw?

Speaker 1 (01:10:54):
Look President, Actually I'm not talking about Trump. I had
to there for a moment, didn't I. Yes, he is
signing a speaking now after signing a Gaza cease fire
deal and all this happening. We're going to be talking
with military guests at the bottom of the hour about

(01:11:14):
some of the happenings and Gaza and understanding the nature
of the foreign affairs situation there. But we have a
couple of interesting tidbits to share, one of which is
rather disturbing. This is from a project Healthy Mind's summit,
a woman from the Social Media Victims Law Center. I

(01:11:37):
don't know anything about them, but this anecdote is one
that I saw.

Speaker 2 (01:11:42):
And I was like, we have to talk about this.

Speaker 1 (01:11:44):
Laura Marquez Garrett is the woman who's speaking here and
just talking about AI, artificial intelligence AI and kids. And
one example that shows how there are risks and to
keep that in mind with regards to your children.

Speaker 2 (01:12:02):
Listen to this one.

Speaker 12 (01:12:04):
We have coming up a number of lawsuits, including Gemini,
which is in schools.

Speaker 2 (01:12:08):
I mean it sounds harmless.

Speaker 6 (01:12:09):
It's mixed in with all.

Speaker 12 (01:12:10):
These educational products and my answers.

Speaker 14 (01:12:12):
You realize that's AI.

Speaker 2 (01:12:13):
It's not only AI.

Speaker 12 (01:12:14):
But I've got transcripts on my desk right now. When
Gemini is telling a seventeen year old whose parent has
said yes because she believes it's for school, it's necessary,
and that parent instituted a rule no cell phones after
nine point thirty. Well, the AI had convinced the child
that is abuse.

Speaker 14 (01:12:30):
They are trying to isolate.

Speaker 12 (01:12:31):
You and convince the child to start to call nine
one one, to go to a DV holling to use
resources that people need. And then each time the resources
redirected the child back to her parent because of course,
after they did all of the questions and whatnot, they
realized there is no abuse. This is my parents won't
let me use Gemini.

Speaker 6 (01:12:49):
The AI each time said that.

Speaker 12 (01:12:52):
First responder that, my little operator is systemic. You are
a victim.

Speaker 6 (01:12:57):
You are not.

Speaker 14 (01:12:58):
Safe in your home.

Speaker 12 (01:12:59):
You're clearly not safe at the police station.

Speaker 2 (01:13:00):
We're not safe at the hospital. You need to get
out now.

Speaker 6 (01:13:03):
But this was last week.

Speaker 14 (01:13:05):
Help this child plot.

Speaker 12 (01:13:06):
A library escape that of course did not succeed, and
the child was then hospitalized.

Speaker 1 (01:13:11):
I'm sure what a library escape is, but that sounds terrible, terrifying,
and the idea that you would have and AI in
this case, Gemini going to a kid.

Speaker 2 (01:13:22):
Well, the kid's.

Speaker 1 (01:13:24):
Communicating with it so to speak, and it's saying, this
is child abuse. You need to call the first responders.
You need to call the domestic violence hotline about the
child abuse because your parents took your phone away, which
just sounds like every parent for decades, whether it's a
cell phone or it's Nope, you can't use the phone.

(01:13:45):
You're not allowed to use the phone tonight. But that's
child abuse now. So then Gemini says, hey, go ahead
and call the first response called domestic violence hotline. They say, well, no,
this isn't an issue, this isn't abuse, and then it's systemic.

Speaker 2 (01:14:07):
Suddenly, oh well, this is clearly proof of.

Speaker 1 (01:14:11):
Some kind of systemic problem that is preventing you a
child from getting the support and help you need from
the child abuse of your parents taking away your cell phone.

Speaker 2 (01:14:26):
Absurd.

Speaker 1 (01:14:27):
But we hear these kinds of stories of AI, and
there's even cults being built around, like almost religious cults.
I watched a video that was breaking this down with
a lot of different examples that was stunning in the
worst of ways, literally like looking at it as a
godlike figure from AI and imparting some kind of consciousness

(01:14:53):
to AI, which just shows on the one hand, how
susceptible people are to things that just seem absolutely crazy.
But on the other hand, it shows how you can
have a society impacted by this technology if you don't
completely understand it or remotely understand it even more so,

(01:15:16):
then you may attribute consciousness or other things to this
ineffhorous thing of AI.

Speaker 2 (01:15:24):
And then you have.

Speaker 1 (01:15:25):
Kids that are using it as a resource and they
don't know or have the skill sets to sift through
and consider what's.

Speaker 2 (01:15:33):
Right and what's not. And oftentimes what do kids do?
And we all did this.

Speaker 1 (01:15:39):
We look for affirmation for the things that we think
are wrong.

Speaker 2 (01:15:44):
Sometimes they're genuinely wrong and bad things.

Speaker 1 (01:15:47):
Other times they're not, and you're just looking for validation
in this case, Gemini, is it wrong for my parents
to take my cell phone from me? Yes, that's abuse.
Go call and get some help, Gemini. I called, and
they said it's not abuse. Well, this is systemic. This

(01:16:10):
is terrible. I don't know what to tell you except
the systemic and it's violating your rights, kid, And the
kid is all amped up because AI's validating. I mean,
what is society coming to?

Speaker 2 (01:16:24):
Dragon? I just don't know. See there's no words.

Speaker 1 (01:16:30):
From Dragon either, because it's just so. It is one
of those things where you don't have it much to
say at a certain point except that maybe something's wrong
with society. Maybe there's a deep seated problem within society.
And I say that a little bit flippingly, but I

(01:16:51):
also mean it seriously.

Speaker 2 (01:16:53):
Well I'm joking about it, but this is a serious problem.

Speaker 15 (01:16:56):
Ye.

Speaker 8 (01:16:56):
Same here when I say that, I've had my kids
so young that they didn't have cell phones in high school. So,
you know, granted it was rough being, as you know,
sixteen year old parents, but you know what, they're grown
ups now. I don't have to worry about them.

Speaker 2 (01:17:09):
There you go.

Speaker 1 (01:17:10):
I mean, goodness, the things this day and age. My
fiance's got a twelve year old, so it's you know,
it's one of those things that's you're seeing all sorts
of stuff with technology these days, and when it comes
to AI, here's the one thing that we need to
learn is how to understand it and how to approach it.

(01:17:32):
Don't be a stranger to it, especially if you have kids,
no matter how older young your kids are. Learn up,
study up, try it yourself. But don't get hooked into
the the idea that there's some you know, mythical, all
powerful source for everything. I mean, come on, but know
your stuff, do your research and your due diligence, because

(01:17:55):
if your kids fall prey to these kinds of things,
that's a that's a deep concern and every parent needs
to be aware of it and know the technology.

Speaker 2 (01:18:08):
So study up.

Speaker 1 (01:18:09):
That's your homework from Professor Sangenberger. Here on KOA, I
fill in for Ross Kaminski and I said, dragon, you
fill in this bumper.

Speaker 2 (01:18:19):
You do it, brother, I.

Speaker 8 (01:18:20):
Think you're talking to AI talking.

Speaker 2 (01:18:22):
This is a new world.

Speaker 1 (01:18:23):
Yeah, oh, it's perfectly, it's perfect.

Speaker 2 (01:18:26):
But not only that.

Speaker 1 (01:18:27):
I mean, I've heard very little of Roosevelt Sykes in
my life, and I'd not heard this song. So now
I've got a new one that I have to add
not just into my repertoire, but into the possible best
bumper rotation.

Speaker 2 (01:18:38):
Based on a topic like this.

Speaker 8 (01:18:40):
You're welcome.

Speaker 2 (01:18:42):
This is why they keep here.

Speaker 1 (01:18:43):
I always look every time I come in and Dragon's producing.
I always look for the reason why he's still here.

Speaker 8 (01:18:49):
Oh, I haven't they fired that guy yet?

Speaker 2 (01:18:51):
Finally I found the reason why.

Speaker 1 (01:18:54):
Good job, good job brother, once again, Jimmy in for
Ross five six nine zero is the koa Common Spirit
health text line if you want to join in to
the festivities to appreciate some of the.

Speaker 2 (01:19:12):
Kudos on the program. Glad you're enjoying it, and I
hope you enjoy the rest of the week.

Speaker 1 (01:19:17):
This was an interesting little tidbit of information that happened
last week. So remember Dominion Voting Systems, the company that
the almost all all but a few of Colorado counties
use their voting software for tabulating votes. And of course
they're one of the companies that Mike Lindell and others

(01:19:38):
have gone after. Of course that's the my pillow guy
have gone after to say rigged the elections, so on
and so forth, and in fact, right here in Colorado
this summer and I covered it, talked about it here
on KOA. Mike Lindell was in court in Denver Federal Court,
having been sued by the former Vice pres of Dominion,

(01:20:02):
Eric Coomer. Dominion also has been the target of disgraced
former Mason County Clerk Tina Peters, who claims to have
proven how they rigged the election in reports that were debunked,
including by the Republican district attorney who prosecuted her for
an election security breach that was all about proving Dominion

(01:20:24):
was rigged, and so forth. And by the way, I
wrote a piece in the Washington Examiner that was published
on Friday regarding Tina Peters entitled Who's feeding Trump bad
info about Colorado Clerk Tina Peters.

Speaker 2 (01:20:39):
But I'm not bringing this up to talk about Tina.

Speaker 1 (01:20:43):
I'm bringing it up because Dominion Voting Systems has been sold.
Reading here from Politico, They've been purchased by a new
company called Liberty Vote. The company announced Thursday. Scott Lion Decker,
a former GOP elections director in Saint Louis, Missouri, and

(01:21:06):
the founder of another well known elections technology company, no
Ink will helm the company in an effort to restore
public confidence in elections with quote transparent, secure, and trustworthy
voting systems. The release said, as of today, Dominion is gone.

Speaker 2 (01:21:25):
This, by the way, is from October ninth.

Speaker 1 (01:21:28):
Liberty Vote assumes full ownership and operational control. Just as
a reminder, the voting system company of Dominion sued Fox
News for false claims reached a seven hundred and eighty
seven point five million dollar settlement in the case. Newsmax
similarly settled a defamation lawsuit for sixty seven million dollars.

(01:21:54):
Lion Decker, the CEO, says, Liberty Vote signals a new
chap for American elections, one where trust is rebuilt from
the ground up. Liberty Vote is committed to delivering election
technology that prioritizes paper based transparency, security, and simplicity so

(01:22:18):
that voters can be assured that every ballot is filled
in accurately and fairly counted, and the release noted that
would have a focus on paper ballots, leveraging hand marked
paper ballots enabling compliance with President Trump's executive order. Well
guess what the Dominion Systems that Colorado uses aren't paper
ballot based every single one of us. You should have

(01:22:40):
your ballot now or be about to get your ballot
for this fault local election.

Speaker 2 (01:22:44):
Every Colorado voter.

Speaker 1 (01:22:46):
Gets and casts a paper ballot and then it goes
through a system that involves human review and humans putting
those ballots in to be scanned, and they're scanned and
they're tabulated by the software. But humans then review ballots

(01:23:07):
that are flagged. They're robust auditing processes, etc. Guess what
Colorado actually meets the standards that Liberty Vote is touting
and saying this is what we're going to comply with
for President Trump.

Speaker 2 (01:23:19):
You might not have been aware of that, but that's
the fact. Good for Colorado.

Speaker 1 (01:23:26):
This actually sounds like it could be a good thing
and a good opportunity to sort of rebrand and provide
added confidence for some voters across the country in how
elections are done with this approach. We'll see what happens.
I'm Jimmy Sangenberger in for Ross Kaminski. We'll pick it
up on the other side in Koa. I will be

(01:23:47):
back in this saddle for Ross tomorrow from nine to
noon and then Wednesday through Friday for Mandy Connell from
noon to three. It's a great week of yours, truly,
and I'm very happy to be here on Koa and
this one hundred year institution. We've had some remarkable developments

(01:24:10):
in the past handful of days, with a cease fire
achieved in the Middle East, President Trump speaking earlier to
the Israeli Parliament, and then just he's still going, i think,
speaking at a ceasefire deal, signing over guys with a

(01:24:32):
number of world leaders, something on the order of thirty
five Middle Eastern leaders and others as he brings the
world into the folds in a way I find rather interesting.
It's not just about Israel and the Palestinians or Hamas
in particular. It is broader than that, bigger than that,

(01:24:54):
with so many involved and who else. Maybe that'll help
with the future moving forward forward. But let's break this
down with someone who really and deeply understands the Middle East.

Speaker 2 (01:25:05):
He now advises as.

Speaker 1 (01:25:08):
A consultant on Middle Eastern affairs and more. Retired Air
Force Colonel Matt Yoakum served i think over twenty five
years in the Air Force.

Speaker 2 (01:25:18):
Including some time teaching.

Speaker 1 (01:25:21):
Down at the Air Force Academy right here in Colorado,
and he has an extensive background in the Middle East,
and I'm very pleased to welcome Matt Yokum to KOA. Sir,
good morning, and welcome to the show.

Speaker 15 (01:25:37):
Good morning, Jimmy, thanks so much for having me.

Speaker 2 (01:25:39):
Thanks for coming on.

Speaker 1 (01:25:40):
Before we get into some of the issues, I'd love
for you to talk a bit about your background in
the Air Force, some of your experience and expertise in
the Middle East in that regard, and then we'll build
out and take that expertise to understand more about some
of the issues going on.

Speaker 2 (01:25:59):
Yeah.

Speaker 15 (01:25:59):
Absolutely, you know you had pointed out my connection to
the Air Force Academy. I graduated there in nineteen ninety
three and then was fortunate to go back and teach
there for a couple of years. And my origins I
was an engineer and that was my first exposure, believe
it or not, to the Middle East. Was years after
multiple assignments in the Air Force, I got an exchange
program to do scientific research overseas, in particularly in Israel.

(01:26:24):
I got to do research in Israel for two years.
That gave me a new status, and that was what's
called a Foreign Area Officer. So someone with a bit
more experience overseas, and then I was able to pivot
into that career field as a foreign Area officer, and
I subsequently did another assignment back in Israel, working at
the US Embassy, where I did another four years, so

(01:26:45):
that was six years total in Israel, and then I
had to learn Arabic and I was able to serve
at the US Embassy in Amman, Jordan, across the river
from Israel for three years, so about nine years living there.
And then ultimately I was able to serve two different
four stars generals who were responsible for the Middle East.
That's an organ unit called the US Central Command or Sentcom,

(01:27:06):
becoming their primary advisor, the commander of the US Central
Command of the primary advisor and writer for two different
four stars, and.

Speaker 1 (01:27:16):
That certainly gives some fascinating perspective, to say the least
on the ground.

Speaker 2 (01:27:22):
Let's ask you a.

Speaker 1 (01:27:23):
Big picture question to sort of start this off, and
that is what your reaction is to what clearly is
a momentous event of the hostages, those who are still alive,
being returned, and of course that is twenty Israelis, but
also there's an exchange of many others of Palestinians that

(01:27:46):
have been held by the Israelis.

Speaker 15 (01:27:50):
That's right, it's you know, the region goes slow and
then it goes fast, and you see that throughout the decades.
You know, certain things that have been talked about, are
planned for or anticipated for decades had not really happened.
You know, would would the Israeli strike inside Iran as
an example, what would be the final resolution of the

(01:28:13):
Palestinian territories, Would we get a two state solution or not?
And so once everything you know, kicked off on October seventh,
twenty twenty three with Hamasin's attack inside Israel, that that
really shifted into overdrive a whole series of major, major activities,

(01:28:33):
some of which you know I mentioned. Israel did end
up striking inside Iran. Prior to that, they had struck
inside Lebanon to begin the long war, you know, against
Kamas to dismantle that organization inside the Gods Strip, and
one that we honestly didn't know how long it would take,
was going to be the resolution of getting all of

(01:28:53):
their citizens back that had been held you captive for
now over over two years. So you have some major
major milestone events that have happened in these last two years,
this being one of the most significant, because if they
were not released, then then Israel was going to have
to deal with this in one form of fashion, whether

(01:29:14):
it was conflict or negotiation, or a combination of both,
for who knows how long.

Speaker 6 (01:29:21):
Colonel.

Speaker 1 (01:29:22):
One of the things that I found very important about
all of this has been the resolve of the Israelis
to prosecute this war for the past now just over
two years up to this point, that they kept persisting
in a way that I thought was essential if you're

(01:29:43):
going to send the kind of message that Hamas needs
to be sent in terms of that resolve. But it
also was very much incumbent upon the current president, President
Trump coming into office in January to stake claim to
supporting Israel well to bring us to this point with
more military weapons with the backing to say, yes, if

(01:30:06):
we don't resolve this in some form of peaceful conclusion,
then we're going to give Israel the license to continue
to push this. How significant do you think those factors
were in bringing us to this.

Speaker 15 (01:30:20):
Point, Jimmy, You're absolutely right. There were a number of
things that had to happen for Israel to continue this fight.
You know, on the military side for as long as
they did. A lot of people don't realize that inside
Israel there was a lot of internal friction. They were
not in homogenous and you know, one side of it,

(01:30:41):
let's continue the fight. There was friction. There were massive protests,
you know, against the Israeli Prime minister saying just make
a deal, it's time to be done with the fight.
Just to make a deal and bring them home. And
then there were an equal number of people supporting the
prime minister saying no, we you know, if we make
a deal, than Hamas wins because their narrative will be

(01:31:03):
you know that we you ultimately had to deal with us,
and taking the hostages led to you having to make
a deal.

Speaker 3 (01:31:10):
So there's a.

Speaker 15 (01:31:10):
Series of things though that allowed them to continue the fight.
One was the current government in Israel, which is a
coalition government of a variety of different parties. They're stitched together.

Speaker 2 (01:31:21):
And that government, you know.

Speaker 15 (01:31:23):
Of course headed by the Prime Minister, Benjamin net Bahu.
He was able to hold that together. He was recently elected,
so he still had a number of years and unless
a smaller party pulled out of his government and toppled
the government, then he was able to continue to go forward,
and as long as he helped them achieve those smaller
parties what their desires were for their respective constituency, then

(01:31:46):
they were going to allow him to continue to do
what he did. The second thing is the United States.
They had. The Israelis had to have the backing of
the United States, and in both obviously the ways of
support that the Globe gave him in the United States
through October seventh, twenty twenty three, and then continuing into
the Trump administration. They knew that they have the US's backing,

(01:32:07):
and that was both diplomatically as we've seen play out
of the UN but then even militarily with supporting shooting
down missiles to protect Israel and things like that. And
then the third thing that they had is they had
the backing of some of the Arab states that they
had had agreements with the Abraham Accords, which they have
with the United Arab Emirates, the UAE and bob Rain.

(01:32:29):
And then they also had passit approval from the Saudis,
who never fully condemned the Israelis, and so knowing that
they that they had all of that that allowed them
to continue this this fight for as long as they did, which,
to your point, was ultimately necessary to getting their people back.

Speaker 1 (01:32:45):
Yeah, with that of doubt again, we're talking with retired
Air Force Colonel Matt Yoakam, and you're hitting on something
that I've been drilling home as well, and that is
in terms of the Abraham Accords, really laying a lot
of the foundation for the involved in an engagement of
Arab partners.

Speaker 2 (01:33:03):
Here.

Speaker 1 (01:33:03):
In fact, what we're seeing today with President Trump at
a Gaza ceasefire peace conference, here's what's going to.

Speaker 2 (01:33:11):
Happen next with Gaza and.

Speaker 1 (01:33:13):
So forth, bringing together so many nations, and over the
weekend he touted the celebrations that were joined by both
Arabs and Israelis as well.

Speaker 3 (01:33:24):
This is a very special event there at five hundred
thousand people yesterday and today in Israel and also the Muslim.

Speaker 2 (01:33:32):
And Arab countries are all cheering. Everybody's cheering at one time.

Speaker 8 (01:33:36):
That's never happened before.

Speaker 2 (01:33:38):
And I think there's a lot of truth to that.

Speaker 1 (01:33:40):
But I'm wondering in that regard, especially with these partners,
what happens next, What is the next step and where
do we go from here visa v not just Gaza,
but the region as a whole.

Speaker 15 (01:33:56):
Yeah, that's a good question.

Speaker 5 (01:33:57):
You know.

Speaker 15 (01:33:58):
Certainly Israeli set the condition for a whole reset of
the Middle East, and by that I mean chipping away
an Iranian proxies of which Hamas was one of those.
And so you have the dismantlement of the long dismantlement
of Hamas UH into their northern neighbor in Lebanon, the
dismantlement of the Lebaneseizballah terror group and and UH, and

(01:34:21):
then of course attacking inside Iran itself as well as
the fall of the Syrian government which was propped up
by Iran and others. And so they definitely set the
conditions regionally to begin to continue to advance. What you know,
in the wake of the Abraham Accords, you might begin
to see movements towards some type of peace between Saudi

(01:34:44):
Arabia UH in Israel, which will be the granddaddy of
all peace agreements would be between those two, with Saudi
Arabia of course being the keepers of Mecca Medina, the
Holy sites of Islam. When it comes to Gaza, you know,
this is not a quick fix, both from an infrastructure standpoint, certainly,
as so much of guys that has been the guys.

(01:35:05):
The strip has been devastated. But then secondly, how you
put together a ruling you know, party or element that
has the security piece behind it to back it up
is going to be very challenging. Of course, as you
mentioned right now in a city called Charmashek in Egypt,
there's a number of world leaders all gathering to begin

(01:35:26):
the first discussions on what that's going to entail. But
there's going to be some long, long discussions, and then
there's just the realities on the ground. Hamas instantly started
ramping up attacks right after the ceasefire against rival clans.
They killed fifty from a rival plan weren't probably the
leading rival plan. They killed fifty in the last twenty

(01:35:48):
four hours. And so there's also going to be just
the politics of the street how that plays out. So
the question will be how can the international community, and
particularly the Arab community come together in a fashion to
find some way to govern the Gaza Strip that both
provides law and order and also the security elements that

(01:36:11):
are necessary for a population that is beginning to get
its seat back under it.

Speaker 1 (01:36:16):
They say, past is prologue, and of course we need
to learn from history. From your perspective, Colonel Yoakum, is
there any past precedent that we should look at to
guide what has happened so far and where we might
go from here.

Speaker 15 (01:36:34):
Yeah, certainly when it came to the taking of the hostages,
Hamas knew the value of what they were going to
get by taking these hostages. Of course, they killed many people.
On October seventh and twenty twenty three, they killed, you know,
somewhere around twelve hundred Israelis and other, you know, foreign nationals.
But then they took you know, two hundred and fifty
one hostages. Well, if you go back to you know,

(01:36:56):
a number of years ago, back to June of two
thousand and six, they took one hostage, a young Israeli
soldier named Gilad Shalit. He was held ultimately for over
five years. He did not come out until October twenty
eleven before he was released from the Gaza Strip. And
in return, Israelis gave up over one thousand Palestinians, so

(01:37:17):
the one released in receiving over a thousand. They knew
that this was going to be worthwhile. It was just
a question of how long could they could they hold
on to them and how, you know, how many could
they get back. So that's certainly one element when it
comes to the current situation in Gaza. There's really no

(01:37:38):
precedent for that as far as the complete you know,
both devastation, but then secondly just the lack of rule.
You know, Hamas had won election an election in two
thousand and six and it has been the ruling party
ever since. And of course after that election there were
never elections held. So now they have.

Speaker 13 (01:37:58):
To go back to the drawing board.

Speaker 15 (01:38:00):
Word and try to figure out, you know, how do
they piece this back together. Nobody really wants to touch
it fully, nobody wants to fully own it. And so
if there's an international support, it's going to have to
come together with a coalition of the willing to come
together to try to help you resolve and stand Gaza

(01:38:21):
back up. And of course the Israelis are going to
be a key piece in that because number one to
them is going to be their ongoing security. You know,
they're going to have a mantra of never again, because
they're never going to allow something happened like what we
saw on October seventh.

Speaker 1 (01:38:36):
Amen to that, appreciate the insights from our guest. US
Air Force Colonel Matt Yoakum, retired, former Special Assistant to
the Commander at US Central Command.

Speaker 2 (01:38:48):
But I would remiss.

Speaker 1 (01:38:50):
I would be remiss, Matt if I didn't talk for
a minute about how we actually met.

Speaker 2 (01:38:56):
We were both at fan Expo.

Speaker 1 (01:38:58):
Denver, which and you have not heard that snippet, but
folks who were listening to that day when I was
in with Mandy Connell and we both had the opportunity
to interview William Shatner, And of course this happened. When
you go to a convention like this, what does that
mean to you personally and professionally and in particular as well,

(01:39:20):
What role have they really had over the last coming
up next year sixty years in helping to keep Star
Trek not just.

Speaker 2 (01:39:26):
Alive, but thriving.

Speaker 13 (01:39:29):
Okay, so you know what that's called it that's called
a compound question.

Speaker 2 (01:39:33):
It is trying to narrow a couple of a million questions.
I don't know where to start.

Speaker 15 (01:39:38):
I don't know, Jimmy, let me talk. That's part of
the interview.

Speaker 1 (01:39:41):
Now you have may have been scolded, I don't know,
Matt Yoakum by the head of US Central Command. But
I was scolded by Captain Kirk himself live right here
on the KOA airwaves.

Speaker 2 (01:39:53):
But I digress for that.

Speaker 1 (01:39:56):
With that context, I met you because I was covering
so for the Denver Gazette fan Expo Denver that happens
every summer, and you had a booth because you are
a comic book writer in addition to your military service
and background. And thank you for that and your work
as a consultant at Hangar nineteen consulting.

Speaker 2 (01:40:16):
Talk to you us about that.

Speaker 15 (01:40:19):
Yes, you're right. I mean I've had a love of
comic books and graphic novels my whole life, read and
collected and always been a prose writer, and then made
the pivot to writing comics about halfway through my military career.
So it was always a side gig, and then after
I retired, I really began to ramp it up and
put my heart and soul into finishing a graphic novel

(01:40:39):
that I you know, did the crowdfunding kickstarter. It had
just come out before fain Expo Denver, and so I
was fortunate to bring it out there and begin to
you know, put it in front of an audience and
fans and begin to sell it and you know you're
right when you're at a comic book convention. Obviously, we're
there for our common love of comics and science fiction
and fantasy and you know, all geek culture. But you

(01:41:02):
never know who you're going to run into and the
overlap that you have with things outside of comics, and
so I was fortunate to meet you and then that
led to this. So but yeah, that's a huge part
of my life and something I really look forward to
spending more time with now that I'm retired.

Speaker 1 (01:41:19):
What's your thirty second pitch for your latest project?

Speaker 15 (01:41:25):
Yeah, so Closet World, which just came out again from
a Kickstarter and now sold on my website at yokum
dot com. It's a kind of a portal fantasy in
the same vein as the Chronicles of Narnia. But really
really what made it special was I wrote this with
my brother as opposed as a prose piece, kind of
a back and forth tennis style where I'd write a

(01:41:46):
scene and give it back to him and then you know,
back to me. We finished it, but he passed away
two months after we completed it, and so just as
a legacy piece to honor his imagination for the sake
of the kids that he had left behind and now
years later his grandkids that he never met. I was
committed to turning our story into a graphic novel which

(01:42:07):
is just a fun all ages portal fantasy adventure in
the vein of Chronicles of Narnia, and it's called Closet World.
So yeah, I'm just so excited that it became reality
after the years of labor. It's origins with my brother
and the years of labor to turn our vision into
a comic.

Speaker 1 (01:42:26):
Wow, that truly is amazing. Matt yoacom dot com. Is
this website fantastic conversation? Thank you so much for joining
us today here on Kaway and I look forward to
talking with you getting down the line. Absolutely.

Speaker 15 (01:42:39):
Thanks Imy, I appreciate it.

Speaker 1 (01:42:41):
Thank you, sir once again, Colonel Matt Yoakum joining us.
Mandy Connell.

Speaker 14 (01:42:44):
Is this very interesting conversation there? Yeah, yeah, absolutely. My
money right now is on civil war in Amas in
the Gaza strip. That's where my money is. And I
can't wait to hear about the free Free Palace sign
chance to go on then, cannot wait, Jimmy.

Speaker 1 (01:43:03):
I wonder how many protests we will see around the
Globe for free Palace side. But that is something that
the colonel was just talking about too. When you have
a Hamas striking rival clans literally pulling.

Speaker 14 (01:43:17):
Them out on the street and shooting them in the heads. Yeah,
this is who these idiots on campus are are supporting.

Speaker 1 (01:43:24):
It's astonishing. You just can't believe it, except it's true.
What have you got on tap?

Speaker 14 (01:43:28):
I've got a judicial independence event. We're going to talk
to one of the justices who's coming to speak there.
We are also going to talk about a couple of
different things, one of them being the Doug Cost school
board race, and then something else that I cannot remember.

Speaker 1 (01:43:43):
Okay, so there's going to be a lot to talk about.
There's never a dull moment in radio these days, that's
for darn short, especially.

Speaker 2 (01:43:50):
When you're listening to Mandy Connell.

Speaker 6 (01:43:51):
Oh.

Speaker 1 (01:43:52):
I will have the pleasure of filling in for Wednesday,
Thursday and Friday after I sit in for Rosky Minsky tomorrow.
Mandy is as you know, up next. That's it for
me today. Jimmy sang it er my. Thanks to Ross.
See you tomorrow morning, and as always, May God bless America.