“Happy Hour”: Joe Kent Conundrum, Demons and the Supernatural, and That Daryl Davis Interview: Emily Answers YOUR Questions

All right, everyone, welcome to another edition of Happy Hour, which is of course itself a special edition of After Party. We do it here every Friday around 5pm. Happy Hour, maybe that starts a little earlier for some of you.

But thanks for being here, as always,

you can send me an email to [email protected]. That is my email address. I do my best to read all of your messages on the show and to respond to them as well. So let's go ahead and start as a reminder. I do go through these live.

“I think this is the only way to make it entertaining to be honest.”

So I will already tell you, I mentioned this on the show Wednesday. I know that I have several emails saying the exact same thing about Darrell Davis. So I'll try to probably put those all together in the same bunch. I flagged them. I flag all of the emails that are coming in for After Party in my inbox as the week goes on.

So I know there's a handful of them and I'll try to put them all in the same section. So it's not jumping around back to Darrell the whole time. Interesting, interesting. I look forward to coming across to those emails. Christine says great episode today on After Party.

I look forward to this every Friday. I heard you talk about the Hello app. I have been using it, but I'm still on the fence on it for me. I wonder if you ever tried Bible in a year podcast. I am 81 days in on that one.

“I'm a lifelong Catholic who recently found my way back to my faith.”

I feel like even after 12 years of Catholic school, I really don't know the Bible very well. I am sort of trying sort of enjoying it, although some of the old testament stuff with all these numbers and lineage and stuff kind of makes my head spin, but I do feel like I'm learning something. I say this all this way too long paragraph doesn't really ask if you have ever used it and

get your thoughts on whether it's a good app to learn more about the Bible, have a great weekend and God bless. Well, thank you Christine. This is a really good question. Actually, the folks from Hallow got in touch with me after last week's episode and they

have a whole explanation up on their website about the non-profit for-profit thing that's great. You can go check it out. Like I said last week, I think Hallow was an amazing app. It's not the best way for me.

“I'm really good just sticking with the print and that's what I've been doing for the last several”

years. Just cover to cover, I guess maybe last couple years, cover to cover Old Testament New Testament in order, I think what I'm going to do from now on is every time I finish

just start over again, beginning to end so that I'm always reading through chronologically

and then supplementing that, of course, with different books from, you know, different faith-based books and the like, that's how I do it. I have listened to the Bible in a day podcast. It's also not for me because again, I'm just, I take in information better reading. I listen to a ton of podcasts, but when I want to be really, really focused on something,

I just have to read it in print, so that's, that's why it's not for me, but I totally get why people love it because it's a really efficient way and I want to say to, to build it into your routine. The other thing I want to say, Christina is, I have the exact same experience going through the Old Testament.

Now that I'm older, I'm really able to take it in as history and kind of contextualize it with different periods in world history and human history and looking at it through that lens has been really, really interesting as well.

So if people have never read it, even if you're not religious, just starting in Genesis

and going all the way through, I mean, it's dry and it takes a long time, but it's not always dry. It can often be dry, live it, I guess, it can often be dry, but taking it all in is a really, really cool experience and you know, I've heard from people who have done what is it like the Bible in 30 days or 60 days, who say that when you read it all that quickly, it's

also interesting because you get some of the big picture stuff, much more, that stuff comes into focus, you know, this is just different methods producing different outcomes. And when you squeeze it all in really quickly and your head is buried in the in the book, in the good book, for so long, for a short period of time, kind of those big narrative arcs jump out at you and you get a sense of the big picture even more clearly.

So that's another thing I've been wanting to try. It's crazy, that's a lot with my schedule, but I don't know people who've done it to have crazier schedules than I do, so maybe I'll do that at some point. Great question, Christine, for me, it just doesn't all, it's been kind of about figuring out what works, what you can get into your routine, so that you don't get out of the

practice. You know what I mean? So you don't get out of the habit, but that the habit is easily kind of built into your life.

most important, but that's what it's about, it's finding the best way to do that.

All right, Ben says, the more I read about Aframan, more I love him, I would love to hear you take. You know how to take on this, Bridget Fettasy, Bridget had a good take on this, feel

“like the libertarians have really been rallying around Aframan, and honestly, I think”

I support it. You know, if looked into the story and I think I'm on his side. So Aframan has been going back and forth, I think it's with the local police department. Let me just pull up a summary real quickly so that we're all on the same page about what's going on.

Oh my gosh, apparently, according to Billboard, his catalog has risen over 500% since his legal victory, 500% that's pretty impressive, all right. So local news, WTA, TAJ, CBS affiliate in Adams County, PA says, hit rapper Aframan recently won a lawsuit from seven Adams County sheriffs in Ohio, but estranges the lawsuit turned out.

It became a bizarre moment in Pennsylvania, Aframan real name Joseph Foreman was being sued by seven officers for defamation after the rapper used his own security footage of a raided as residents to mock the sheriffs via music videos, including the popular song Lemon Pound Cake. The lawsuit didn't go in the officer's favor, which many said it was also a win for the

first amendment, and that free speech certainly carried over to Adams County, Pennsylvania.

Apparently, the local sheriff says they're being bombarded with calls around the country, so news update, we did not arrest rapper Aframan, what we love all the calls in the colorful language with accents from around the country, I assure you it wasn't this Adams County. We ask you, please verify the state before you call voicing your frustration that our deputy, the rest of Aframan, just excellent stuff.

He was according to Aframan in Chicago at the time of the raid and was called by neighbors quote alert him of police presence, and I guess money was missing from his home afterwards. That's part of this according to Adams County Pennsylvania, the local CBS in Adams County, Pennsylvania. But of course, this happened in Adams County, Ohio, so it's a fact of everywhere in the

United States. I'm sure there are many Adams counties that are being bombarded, but yes, this was Adams

“County, Ohio, Aframan, as in Chicago, and I think it does sound like a free speech victory.”

There are a lot of, I think sometimes the right has an instinct to quote back the blue because the blue gets so much unfair, gets so many unfair attacks from the left, and I think from some corners that are just honestly transparently anti-police would abolish the police. And most Americans on board were not born with abolish the police, of course, that sometimes sometimes the police are like armed agents of the state, which we want in our communities,

of course, but sometimes that's, you know, power goes to people's head, and that's a special trick on a local level. You can get the trailer park boys phenomenon with Randy. If you watch trailer park boys, you know, exactly what I'm talking about. You're local communities, and maybe we had a little Randy situation here with Aframan. All right, move again. Monique says, this is a longer email. This is about joke ant, all right. Just wanted to comment

on joke ant has resignation. I think all that is fine, and if it wasn't a good fit anymore, that's his business where he went wrong is that he did it in the midst of the war with Iran. He could have waited until everything calmed, highly discommed down and did it quietly. Instead, he wanted to make a statement and make it all about him. And I think it was highly disrespectful,

“especially coming from such a high rank in the military. He should no better. That's why”

I believe he wanted to make Trump in this administration look bad, and therefore I don't think he is someone you can totally trust. Then not only did he quit, unless then 24 hours after he allowed himself to be interviewed by Tucker Carlson, who was somewhat controversial, and he knew

that lots of people would listen. I never know who joke ant was or is, but I know who he is now,

and he's someone that is disrespectful and wanting attention and glorification. In closing, I say to Joe Good-Rizzan, "Rizzan, stop talking, grow up, you're acting like a child, but mostly you're hurting our country." And this very sincere president wanted to do the right thing, and had the ball to do it, excuse my language. All right, Monique, thank you for the email. Uh, I think that we have another, yeah, we have another couple emails here about Joe Kent. I'll read

this one from Sue, who says, "I found your discussion about Iran with John Danil Davidson confusing

on Iran?" The Trump administration reportedly banned him from intelligence briefings because of

concerns about leaks. Was he in briefings or not in briefings, if not, then how does he offer worthwhile informed contributions? The U.S. struck Iran on Saturday, February 28th because the top 40 Iranian leaders were meeting above ground in one place. What's the origin discussion really about? How have pundits forgotten the above ground 40 leader meeting? Where is it convenient overlook to generate clickable copy? Uh, here's one from Bob, who says, "The attacks on this man,

a true American patriot and hero who resigned from his post and principled opposition to this war by this administration and its supporters is both predictable and disgusting. And there's nothing

to do with anti-Semitism and what it really highlights is the issue of initiating the only war in

the 250-year history of our country that lacks the support of the American people. We can now just see if we have any other Joe Kent emails to make sure we kind of tackle them all at the same time, not to, to avoid kind of jumping back and forth, yeah, okay. So this looks like what we have on Joe Kent. All right, so Monique and Sue are anti and Bob is pro. And it's not surprising that we

“have emails from different directions on this because, you know, I think people's opinion on Joe Kent”

right now is heavily covered or is heavily colored by their broader perception on the war in Iran. Which makes sense, right? Because if you think that the war is right in just, then you see what Joe

Kent did as disrupting a righteous and just cause. If you don't think it's right, then you see

him as really blowing the whistle. So that makes sense. And since you all sent these emails in a lot more has happened, I think most of these probably came last Friday Saturday around that time period and Kent has since been everywhere. You know, he did go on Tucker. He went on with Megan last Friday. He went on with my colleague, Sawker and Jenny, breaking points last Friday. And since then, he's been on with Markle of Vin. And that conversation was very interesting if you haven't listened to it yet.

Live in questions him, just like Megan did, just like Sawker did on the leaking and such. And Kent is very firmly denying all of it. Then this week, Megan covered on her show. Another controversy broke out because Kent had done an interview with Michael Schallemberger. And Kent told Schallemberger, he would testify. If it meant testifying in, if he was called

“by Tyler Robinson's team, as I think was the thrust of this quote, then yeah, he would testify.”

There was the same thing that he had said in the media over and over again, which is he felt as though there were leads about potential foreign involvement that were not exhausted. So this set off another string of controversies because Blake Neff, who I've known for a long time, and Andrew Cole that over at the Charlie Kirk Show, tried those close friends, were infuriated. They had Schallemberger on a right away and just teed off because

they saw that as a really deep betrayal of Charlie as Joe Kent fermenting conspiracy theories that take the focus away from like trans-teefa and Tyler Robinson. And then Joe Kent was also accused by some people who were in a group chat with Charlie of leaking, I don't know if leaking is the right word for this, but of sending a picture that had been given to him while he was in the government for investigative purposes, two Candace Owens. And he denies that as well. So we're going to

see how some of the shakes out. Yes, the Trump administration accused Kent of leaking. He has totally denied that. Probably some of this is going to depend on the definition of leaking, right,

“because if you're talking as I assume he was to be honest, just like here DC, I think the consensus”

is that he was chatting with people either in like news media or podcast space while he was in the government. But I think a lot of people see leaking as being classified information, confidential information, documents, that sort of thing, not kind of just having conversations. Now that can count, obviously, if you're sharing confidential or classified information, if you're chatting about kind of the mood, if you're chatting about what you think should

happen, what you think might happen. Whether that's considered leaking, I'm saying just as a journalist, as opposed to, you know, talking to your friends, right, because if he's friends with this podcast or this journalist blah, blah, blah, that would be potentially a way to deny leaking while also

one of the reasons I probably couldn't work in government is that, you know, I don't know that I would be able to cope with information that I think should be public, not being public. But if you're in government, obviously, you sign up to be responsible with the information you

have access to. And so I'm always torn about this because I think whistleblowers are really,

“really, really, really, really important. I think the government, you understandably, but”

unfortunately, tries to thwart whistleblowers. And I also think loyalty and self-discipline to commitments that you make are important. So I think this is a serious ethical conundrum, and I don't know what Joe Kent was saying behind the scenes. I actually never talked to him. And I've admired him, but I've never talked to him. I think he's friendly with others, like, in podcast world, and in the conservative world, you know, if you're not even talking

to a journalist, but if you're talking to somebody else in the government about what's happening

at ODI and I, that leaking, that person then, you know, it's just, it could be so many different

things. I, as someone who can say that he's not a source of mine, I don't know what those relationships are like, but on the basic question, if he didn't think he could support the president, he did the right thing by no longer putting himself in the position to be in ODI and I, that's my perspective on it. He says he believes this war is wrong, and he served. He's earned his right to say that he believes this war is wrong, and that he believes the intelligence was wrong. It does seem

per all of the interviews he's given in the last week that Kent was kept out of briefings. Totally seems like it. Whether it was because they didn't trust him or because they didn't like

his foreign policy and they stopped trusting Tulsi Gabbard after she put out that nuclear holocaust

“video last year. I believe it was a head of midnight hammer, because they're just these like”

really, really deep ideological differences. There's a golf, an ideological golf between Tulsi Gabbard and a lot of people in the White House. So, is it because they were leaking or because they didn't trust them? Because let me tell you, the leak accusations are constantly weaponized by people who leak just as much as everyone else. Anyone who says they are taking a principled stance against leaking in a high profile position in the government, I've seen people do it, it's bullshit,

because a lot of people who do it are leaking themselves. And so I would take that with a gigantic gigantic grain of salt. It's accepted as a norm in this administration in any administration. We might not like it as members of the public, but it is accepted as a norm and as an ethical thing to do when you want to, you know, get a particular message out to the public. So, it's also very likely that's being used cynically, hypocritically as a smear against Joe Kent. So, I'm not saying that

what he's saying is totally true or, you know, everything that he said is totally responsible. He probably went further than he should have in that conversation with Tucker Carlson when they were discussing Butler and Charlie, I agree with Blake Neff when he says it sounds like somebody vague posting on Facebook, you know, like I know something, you know, watch this space, that type of thing, I agree. And it's really frustrating. At the same time, if you're on a journalist show in your

ass point blank about X, Y, or Z, it's also really hard when you know information, not to get into that information. So, he's in a difficult position because what he wants to do and he said he's wanted to do is stop the war. He resigned so that he could talk to as many people as possible

“calling for the word to be stopped, which I think is, again, if you've served and your”

gold star has been, you've lost your wife in a Middle Eastern conflict, I think you've earned your right to do that. People might not like it, they might not agree with you, but he's also being smeared. He's the subject of a smeared campaign and he was a very high level intelligence official. So, he did, he said he still had access to the PDB, the presidential daily briefing. So, to say he was out of the loop because he wasn't in briefings, that's just not correct. When you're at OD and I,

you know things. So, was he in on all of the meetings? No, but the just of the intelligence would have been known to Joe Kent. So, this is a long-winded way of kind of addressing whatever one said here, just another response to Sue about the Saturday meeting of the top Iranian leaders being above ground in one place and that making it a good time to strike.

was in Reuters that taking at the Ayatollah could result in even more hard-line succession

from the Ayatollah, that someone even more radical would take his place. And actually, that was what people suspected in 1979. There were some people in the intelligence world that suspected that would be the case in 1979. This wasn't like a revolution necessarily just secular revolution. There were a

“lot of different factions fighting for power. And so, that's why the origin still has to be”

questioned, because we know from people in the government, we know from Dan Kane, reports about what Dan Kane was briefing Trump on. We know that there was skepticism about doing that Saturday strike

that Trump had been informed. The risks were there. And so, yes, I agree with you.

You know, it's important to give Trump agency and to say, he made this decision because he thought it was rational to take this window and act during that window when you could take out the Ayatollah and other leaders. What I don't believe is actually that that was a rare one-time opportunity because I've heard that many times, like through over the years, you could have done it then, you could have done it then. You could have done it then. This stuff, I mean, they were, they had a

“cudd's day coming up. I think you probably would have had similar opportunities down the line,”

as well. I think the timing was that Netanyahu thought it was a sort of ripe opportunity. And when we figured that Netanyahu was definitely going ahead, we said the timing is right for us now too. It's you know, midnight hammer, uh, decimated, but they're building stuff back. And that was our decision because a lot of people in our government also agree with Netanyahu about taking out Iran. So, there's a lot going on, uh, but I really just, I don't have this anger at all towards Joe Kent,

given what he went through as a veteran and given that he has been open about his philosophical disagreements even as somebody who was hawkish towards Iran. And he was in the past hawkish towards Iran. He's been supportive even in his interviews of midnight hammer as a limited strike. So, I really feel like we just all need to be, have our eyes open to the smear campaigns. It doesn't

mean that the smear merchants are always wrong, right? Like it's wrong to be a smear merchant,

and to be hypocritical and run these smear campaigns that aren't based in fact sure.

“It doesn't mean they're always directionally wrong, but I think in the case of Joe Kent,”

it is a really, it is wrong to not let this man say his piece. I feel like he is absolutely earned the right to say his piece. He didn't do it while he was in the government publicly. So, I really have been, it's been hard to watch. I think some of the backlash, I think people have a real emotional backlash to Joe Kent because they're upset with the media for taking an anti-Trump tone on this war. I get that. Totally understand it. But I also think while that all may be true,

there's a lot of reason to not buy into the smear campaign. The other thing I want to say is Megan did a great segment on Blake and Andrew's coverage of Kent and Shalom Berger's conversation, so many people to name in this controversy, but Megan did a great segment explaining actually why this doesn't jeopardize the legal case against Tyler Robinson, which she believes is extremely strong. So, I would go check that out on YouTube or on her podcast at Believo's on Wednesday's

edition of the show. If you're interested in more from this, Monique, thank you, Sue, thank you, and Bob, thank you. That was a long detour on the Joe Kent front, but I think worthwhile, I think worthwhile. We didn't cover Joe on the show again this week. Honestly, some of it was just getting so ugly and Iran coverage. It's hard to do Iran coverage. Let's just say it's hard to do Iran coverage on the after party too much. The tagline I rolled out this week is if you

like your news a little later and a little lighter, I don't know, I'm I'm workshopping it. I'm workshopping it, but that's really what the show was supposed to be about, so we covered it last week when it was big breaking news, that was too hard to ignore. But it was good to kind of get through some of these questions on a happy hour today because I know we've all been thinking about it, it's kind of been on the back burner of the news cycle still over the course of the week. This is from

absolutely true. I think that would be a great topic free to explore more explicitly. There are

a lot of great people who work in the civic space. Nate says his work touches on this and you know, quite a few in D.C. focused on this as well. There's reason to be optimistic and hopeful about civic life. Well, I hope that's the case. Nate to paraphrase your evocation of hope or to repeat it. Yeah, I do hope that's true. I know that Washington is very, very divorced from communities around the country. My family's been involved in some local stuff

“for a long time and so I've seen this up close and it does make me hopeful when I think about that.”

So this is a, I think a really, a really warranted counterweight to some of my doom and gloom. Nate, I appreciate that. Local governments can be, they can range from, you know, parks and wreck level awfulness to a parks and wreck, wreck level inspiration, right? Like, inspirational community, cooperation, across that divided and difficult issues. And it could get so nasty, but it can also get so moving at times. I like this comment, Nate. So this is some good food for thought.

All right. Howard says, I think you are one of the brightest people I've come across and continue to be amazed. Thank you. One of your shows originally used the word epistemological seven times. I had to go look it up very smart. So it's a bit surprising you show it through on Daniel Davidson. When the two of you went off in the weeds on the mystical demons, really? This is 2026 or 1326. I was kind of expecting the next segment to be on people that have gone up and flying saucers.

“There are people who claim that I promise you they're out there. What about a lepocons and fairies?”

They sound like fun. It seems strange that the brilliant Emily would have a serious conversation with some clown who takes a step seriously. Of course you're as part of the me and maybe you know something I don't. You said that he called you after the show and asked you to come. If he had come across

it's crazy, the answer is yes, maybe a demon made him do it. Howard. So John is a good friend of mine.

I know when I brought him on, I said he was like, he's like a mentor or someone I consider a mentor. He's also brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. Definitely one of the smartest people I know, one of the most principal people I know. And I do recommend John's book if you think this all sounds wacky. There are some different books I would recommend checking out. I have one of them right behind me. I'm not remembering the name right now. I think it's called The Devil's Best Trick.

And that is a great book. It's a dark book but it's a great book. Roddrares recent book on the re-entrant of the re-entchantment. I think it's called Life in Wonder. It deals with all of the stuff really, really directly. I read Rodd's work every single day. And I think about this stuff a lot. And this comment about 2026 and 1326 is funny. I mean, I have this weird, I don't know many people I guess who find themselves spending so much time with the left. And I mean like the real left,

not the kind of center left, and the populist right. And that I do think is like a vantage point. I think it's perspective that I wish more people had because when I talk to folks in the left a lot, my conversations are you are missing something from potential voters, potential persuadable people when you are divorced from the language of religion, which is so central to so many people's lives on the right. Sometimes it's, you know, this is esoteric. And

it's not going to appeal and it's probably not even practical at some point. I like Aaron Rens framing of this as the negative world. I think we're talking about this in a show a couple of weeks ago, especially like some Christians who expect that the world, it was because somebody chastised me in an email for laughing at something really like that some, like I think of a some sexual celebrity comment and someone chastised me for laughing at. I think a big mistake a

“lot of Christians make in in 2026 is expecting that American culture and public life is going to”

reflect a Christian ethics in the way that it might have in, you know, 1986, something along those lines.

So it's, I'm always kind of squeezed by both of like going between both of those spheres and I find

it really really interesting. But I'm an evangelical Christian. I'm absolutely somebody who believes

Rod's book on this. I think Rod's a little more woo. I frailfully am Billy Hallowell also has a

great book called Playing with Fire. John was subbing in the last minute to replace Billy because John wrote a book. I think for really more from a Catholic perspective called pagan America about

“a lot of this. But that's why we were talking about it because Billy was on to discuss his new”

docu-series or documentary that you can find called supernatural angels and demons. I think that's the title of it. People throughout history have taken angels and demons in the supernatural theory seriously. I got marked relentlessly by some of the people who watched like breaking points on the left when Charlie Kirk was killed and I did a segment on Jezebel saying an author Jezebel saying they had a paid in Etsy which to cast curses on Charlie before he died.

One of them I think was that his head would pop off. Which is the area and gives you chills and a lot of people like oh Emily's obsessed with Etsy which is she thinks Etsy which is our serious. No I actually think the supernatural is serious. You couldn't possibly shame me by mocking that. I haven't it's serious because it's real. The spiritual world is real. Most humans have believed that. It's only been the last 100 years that we thought we were too smart that we could

explain everything. Premier unbelievable is a podcast network and a channel that I really like. They've done a lot of episodes with some brilliant scientists who because of the advanced nature of their scientific work they have come to believe in God and in Christ. So I cannot recommend those episodes enough. Go check those out. If you're interested if your intrigue is peaked by any

“of this it is really interesting stuff but I think also you know we the last 100 years have been”

hypernovel as Brett Weinstein and Heather Heing say in their book 100 Gatherers Guide to the 21st Century and that's blinded us to the reality of this spiritual world in certain ways. So Rod's book is really great on this life and wonder living and wonder I think is what it's called. It's excellent. Jessie says in a little over a week I will be completing my conversion to catholicism at Easter Eve vigil. In aspect of the faith I still struggle with is speaking about

the issue of life. I made Jen X male who grew up in deep blue New York. It's hardwired into me that Christianity of being pro-life. It goes disrespecting women and the rights. When confronted by liberals about my conversion and issues like abortion and same sex marriage I usually just take the position of well I'm not planning on having an abortion or getting same sex married. It shows catholicism because of its message of peace and dignity for the poor.

I figure being comfortable with hot button social issues comes in time.

“We'll come in time. Do you have any advice as a conservative woman of faith?”

Well this is a really good question Jessie because I've basically been Christian in a blue city for like 15 years so it's something I've had to think about a lot

and probably wouldn't have had to think about a lot if I never left home and many people live

where they grew up and they grew up in red areas culturally similar areas and alike. So I just have been thrust into a world where you're confronted with that a lot and I would say on abortion I definitely recommend Christy for Hitchens work. I always recommend Christy for Hitchens work. He says you know basically what is the what is the entity after implantation two questions. Is it alive and is it human? Okay so then you have a human life and when do you think it's okay

to take a human life and some people will go all the way to the logical conclusion saying well if you don't have brain waves if you don't have heart beat and they get to the territory where you're

basically talking about people in Columbus elderly people who are in vegetative states and alike

and they will push that far and be honest about it but that makes a lot of people uncomfortable because it puts the power to end human life. You know of people who aren't making capable of making that decision for themselves in other people's hands and for me drawing those lines is not our job so unless it's self defense of course and that's one of the other reasons that you know I love the message or the gospel. It's blessed or blessed with the peacemakers and so I totally understand

especially if you listen to pro lifers that get ignored by the mainstream media do a very good job of elevating the voices of people who have just been exploited by the abortion industry. Again these stories often get totally ignored. People in inner cities are exploited by the abortion

like a baby in their toilets it's really really horrible horrible horrible so the issue just doesn't get treated with the fairness and fullness it deserves and I know a lot of people who as they look into it more become parents themselves who go through ultrasounds and they'll like change their minds

on it so I would I always just recommend you know time people to read more giving them more sources

to think more about it and one of the great things that I've heard from my pastor is I don't get to change this book this book changes me and we were talking a lot about religion today so I'll probably change keep this short but I like that formulation because if you believe historically that Jesus Christ died and rose again boom you don't get to change the book the book is to change you like that's the predicate that there was a human being who walked the earth who rose

from the bed and if you believe that that is historically true as again there are historians who believe that there is read case for Christ that's a really that does a really good job with this Tom Holland has done a good job with this many have done a good job with this but if you believe that nothing has has changed the world like that one event in human history and so you don't get to change

“the book book it's changed you there are a lot of ways to think about it but I think always just”

just going deeper and you're recommending reading I feel like that's a really good way to do it because it's coming from place of humility saying I read this and it changed the way I thought about something and or I read this and I hadn't heard X Y and Z before so that that would be my advice congrats Jesse that's awesome let's see how it says that I viewed your comments on the CBS

evening news having less than 4 million viewers and how bad that is being curious I checked to see

how many viewers the program had back in the glory days well to cronkai 30 million I guess they didn't call him the voice of God for nothing oh my gosh that is something else and it looks like Howard also asked when there is a briefing at the White House or some other situation where reporters are gathered they listened to comments to the president or maybe the press second and there's an opportunity for questions I know that as a member of a major news organization

they're entitled to attend a report on a news but when it comes to time for questions each reporter raises their hand and waits to be called on so if the president or other official knows that a certain reporter is going to be miserable why go on them well if they're from one of

the major networks you kind of have to deal with them because there's this constant tug of war

happening behind the scenes with the press secretary the press team the entire administration really and that network so the administration is constantly trying to give as little as possible and they're trying to get as much as possible so that involves making deals and compromises we'll let you interview this person at this time we'll give you 10 minutes on camera we'll give you a comment for this article like the way it works behind the scenes it's actually very political on

an interpersonal level and so it's just an easy thing to do because you can predict what the networks are going to ask 10 times out of 10 and usually the big papers too trump likes the fight so he'll call on people who are going to spar with him just by any time but the networks typically end up asking similar versions of the same questions because they all want a clip on the same issue for their their nightly news broadcast or their morning news broadcast so it's just something

like it's pretty easy for most presidents to take their questions and that's an insult to them by the way so that's where it comes from now it's also not unusual for a president to kind of know

“they should call on one person or the other people saw when Biden actually had I think the name of”

who's going to call on or list at one point that's again not entirely unusual because it's part of the negotiations that the press team has with the reporters what shouldn't be happening is they're asking the reporters what the reporters are going to ask sometimes I know that they'll ask for a topic and I don't think I've ever been asked for a topic but sometimes I've heard of that happening and you know hopefully the reporters aren't giving them the exact question and they're not asking

for the exact question but it does happen where they'll have a list because it's like they want to make sure Biden or whoever it is I don't know if Trump's ever done it I think he has gets to this person or this person because they they said they would likely get a question something like that let's see how it says I was surprised to find you were into hunting and fishing this was in the independent women profile who knew when the apocalypse comes you will be all set that

is quite a change from the woods it was constant the man has at least he so the profile this happens

“sometimes I don't remember exactly what I said it did make it sound at one point like I was hunting”

and fishing every week and hopefully I didn't say anything to that extent but sometimes things

yes I've only been hunting a couple of times it's boring and cold fishing all the time growing up

my grandma live on a lake and we were up there you know for a while we were my dad was like remodeling my grandma's place so we were up there house a kid for a couple of years like every weekend love fishing as a kid love fishing as a kid it's so much fun I do it pretty much every time I get back to the lake but my brother was more the the fisher than I was I think what I said was

“something to the extent of like that's what my family grew up doing that's what I grew up doing with”

my family or no I would have said that's what my family did when I was growing up and it's true like it's just like with my brother he was like obsessed with with fishing and the profile was me saying that was partially I would see the stereotypes of like redneck Christians with guns who were hunting and fishing in the media and it just drove me crazy and it was a fixture during the Obama era and it's one of the reasons I did when I come to Washington DC

I get into that in the profile you can go read it at the the IW website if you're interested you haven't seen it yet go ahead over there there's nothing I hate more than taking pictures and ask answering questions about myself so that's why it's a little painful to see you can probably tell this is from Craig who says you don't in my recommendations but I feel compelled to throw this out here a few people I'd love to see having the show Sarah is girl um she's on this partial lot

balances out their typical eggheady knee jerky never trumpism she seems to actually understand

“why people both trump over establishment type politicians I think Sarah is good does understand that”

better than most people and never trump circles because she does focus groups um this is my commentary on it so that was suggested to me at some point not long ago and I kind of blanched at it maybe I should reconsider maybe I should reconsider it we'll see I guess I still find it a little bit what's the best word sometimes bad faith but I might be judging too harshly so maybe I'll maybe I'll take another look Carl Cannon from RCP I know you've mentioned him a few times

I'm a faithful RCP listener as well I'd love to get Carl's unhindered perspective on things I don't know that you want it to be that unhindered Carl Cannon is great listen to the RCP show Carl Cannon is one of the most interesting people that I know he's like the DoSac case man so if you want the insights from somebody who's been in Washington journalism for decades and at some of the highest levels Clinton administration I mean this man has seen it all motion administration

“trump Obama he knows the stuff up and down and has met every interesting person in politics”

he's fascinating so I I do recommend the RCP show and then Craig says Phil Wegman from RCP look up straight shooter and you see Phil's picture DoSac reporting is top notch well Craig that is a great recommendation fill up unfortunately can't come on the show because he is my boyfriend that's just not a good idea you don't you don't mix work in personal like that we've been together a long time love Phil literally love Phil he is great everybody should follow his work if they

haven't yet he's on social media he's a great twitter account if you like scoops and Dylan use updates he is the best so it's a really good suggestion Craig unfortunately not going to do that one alright here we go there old Davis this one's from John who says Darrell Davis says trump is a racist he seems like an honest broker and I'm willing to hear him out give me examples you could have respectively followed up on that statement but you did not why this one is from

Sabina who says why appreciate your challenging me to listen to people I disagree with the conversation with Darrell Davis was a bit frustrating one example when he said that a European artist who was trying to bring to the US was afraid to come here you did not ask why or push back on the one hand I really want to know why on the other it sounded like hyperbole this one is from Sarah I'm not kidding there are a lot of questions here I don't want to take anything away from

Mr. Davis's work and bringing people together and I understand your point in this conversation was more likely was was likely more interview than confrontational but I felt there were so many contradictions and straw men in the conversation that it was difficult to finish he began by calling trump a racist and later claimed we need to get back to the original definition of racist that's an interesting observation Sarah I'll flag that for people to keep in mind

you go on to say Sarah maybe he does criticize the left as you claim and I'm never

postponing out trump so the rates contradiction failings but it's difficult to hear criticism that seems to come from a mild case of TVS and is sprinkled with contradictions and take it seriously just my two cents and I appreciate you interviewing a variety of people but it may have been interesting to even lightly push back on some of his assertions let's see what else do we have here

the impetus to disappear as clients men and Nazis of their obviously viable beliefs at least someone thought it was worth trying but he's really going after the low hanging fruit isn't he I mean how much influence to the clan and Nazi party have in twenty twenty six Hank suggests he picks up a copy of Jack Castles untenable color and we skeptical that any European musicians are afraid to come to America if they are what information are they consuming that caused this fear

“I'll just enter direct tank I honestly don't doubt that one bit like I you guys know I'm a”

communist that unheard which is based in London and so I do absorb a good bit of chatter from across the pond and I doesn't surprise me one bit there's so much fear migrating I mean you've seen Davos and EU meetings there's so much fear migrating about the United States certainly not from unheard by from people in Europe they really have stereotypical beliefs about Europe so it doesn't it wouldn't surprise me at all um about that so that's Hank this one is

from civil I admire you for bringing such a range of guests on your podcast for your conversation with Darrell Davis was fascinating I was disappointed that you didn't press him on that claim is Trump is that Trump is racist I don't believe it and I kept waiting for you to ask him why he believes this especially in light of so many black people supporting him you could have also asked him if you thought Biden was racist yes Biden said if you don't vote for me you ain't black

were you so impressed by him and his work that you didn't want to push back on such an incendiary claim claim or do you just agree with him that Trump is racist by the way I give listening to your podcasts thanks for your response well thank you civil let's say if we have any moral any more Darrell Davis questions oh Sarah I I read I think I already read Sarah's email Sarah's and another email to apologize for that email no Sarah don't apologize for being

critical in your emails and for giving critical feedback I don't mind it at all I appreciate it

like him for anything else here yeah okay so I think I just got through all of the Darrell comments thanks for writing it like I just said in response to Sarah I really don't mind it I appreciate it and when Darrell said when he made the claim that Donald Trump is a racist on the show immediately started formulating in my head ways to politely push back on Darrell and what was the question I was going to ask him well I was going to ask a couple of times I wanted to ask

a version of this many black Americans disagree with you that Donald Trump is a racist and then I was going to work that into the question about the definition of racism which we got to at the end and one of you noted he said at the end he believes the left use of two broad a definition of racism sometimes when you're doing interviews you your mind especially longer interviews

is going in a million different directions and when you want to frame a question in a particular

way you forget so that did happen at the end I did mean to work that into the question at the end I didn't do it in the moment because we were having like a flowing discussion about bigger picture things than Trump to be honest I didn't really want to talk about Trump in that conversation at all I probably shouldn't even use Trump as a news hook to be honest because it's distracting sometimes from the bigger issue but this is all like Monday morning quarterbacking myself

I don't mind you all Monday morning quarterbacking me at all I didn't mean that majority of

“way that's what the email inbox is for but you know these interviews are just I try to be pretty”

casual in my interviews and to have a conversation that's not so much heated but I think it would have been great to ask Darrell that question I don't at all deny that I think it would have been great

to ask Darrell that question but the flow of a conversation that is always paramount to me

as opposed to getting in every disagreement so I usually air on the side of conversation unless it's a public figure that is like a politician or somebody who has like significant influence over our daily lives like a CEO or something like that then I will always prioritize accountability over conversation and it's honestly why on a conversational show like after party which must be pretty casual I don't do too many politician interviews we do them on breaking

points but yeah that's and that's a different story right by the way because we're left right

“and you have to prioritize what gets asked and when you interrupt and all of that stuff based on”

handing off questions between one person and another but yeah with Darrell I don't actually don't disagree with any of you that I think it would have been really interesting to get his point on that in fact I wanted to ask him in the moment to get his point on that and when the conversation was flowing I said I will work that into this question that I have towards the end of

have a piece of paper in front of me so when you type things out I just don't tend to remember them

that much but you know again I feel like that's I don't think it was wrong to not ask that question

“respectfully I guess disagree you know I think it would have been better to ask that question I think”

would have been interesting to get his answer to that question but would respect say I respectfully disagree that it was wrong not to ask it if anybody disagrees with that because he's much more interesting than Trump his experiences are much more interesting than Trump and for me the goal of the conversation I don't disagree that maybe there's a little I think with Trump I mean the other thing is by the way this is something that was going through my mind during the interview as well

Trump has said many things I do not think people are wrong to say that sounds racist same with if you said Biden saying what he said uh be that one of you pointed out if you don't vote for me you ain't black I mean what was the other thing Biden said if you in in my state you can't walk into a seven eleven without having a slight Indian accent you haven't seen that video of Joe Biden that's like good one too but Trump has said a lot of things that many

people take his jokes I get it but I'm not going to litigate every quote that Donald Trump has

“ever said and I think actually there's a that's part of the reason I wanted to build it into”

the bigger question about the definition of racism because then it wouldn't be a back-on-fourth on well how can you say this isn't racist or that isn't racist because Trump says he talks like no other politician so anyway that's my answer to the question I didn't think it was worth I think if you asked that question in the moment you end up litigating specifics but I did want to bring it in to the end because I do think it's genuinely interesting although I was glad to hear

Darrell say he believes the left operates on two big of a definition of racism two broad of a definition of racism and overall that was the purpose of the discussion if you want to hear Darrell more in like an even longer form format he's done rogue in a couple of times and they are incredible he goes into more depth about the a couple of the stories he told on the show he goes into even more depth about them they're utterly fascinating and he just has the the street cred

“especially with a lot of people on the left who I think need to hear his message so that's why”

I wanted to bring him on the show and talk to him about that again I think there are people on the left who really need to listen to what he's gone through people he's talked to and where he comes

down on still having conversations still never giving up on people and I listen to his latest

rogan when all of the heritage foundation controversy was brewing like last fall and it was just like I think that's when we we invited him on the show because I was really moved by his rogan episode amidst all of this conversation on the right about purging this person and purging that person and the like so anyway that's a little background of the interview but I don't necessarily disagree with the emails that you said thanks so much like I really don't mind the the criticism all right

Abe says listening to your interview with Miles just now love that guy so grab glad you brought up the made up tea Carlson quote it was just posted on InstaPundit and the comments are all what happened attacker let's see goes on to say tribalism is killing the country yet right now Abe thinks for the email um I'm getting like backlash on x from people saying the same thing like oh Tucker did defend Sharia x y and z even if you think that his general sentiment has been

more pro Islam than you agree with even if you think that it's still matters that people told a blatant and spread told and spread a blatant lie about a quote that put words into his mouth your argument is weaker if you're not arguing against the actual quote so it's bad for everybody if you take a verbatim quote and put it in someone's mouth falsely that is not good for anyone that is what we talked about on the right for the last 10 years about the importance of truth if you are not starting

from the same foundational point of truth then you are already off to a bad start when you are in arguments or public policy debates or campaigns or efforts to change someone's mind change the world and alike we have to defend truth at all costs as cliched and silly as that sounds so it is

never okay to put made up words in someone's mouth people do it for cynical political reasons

partisan reasons um but it's not okay it's it's never okay even if you think Tucker has defended Sharia on other occasions you don't say he said something he didn't it's not good for anybody so again thanks to the email Abe um Marlosa's it was challenging for me to listen to terrible table says I deeply disagree to some strong opinions it makes me wonder and all of his hundreds of conversations

funny we all have our our our blind spots right I think pretty much everybody has their blind spots you see

it was some of the like uh intellectual dark web people who have been anti you know group think conformity partisanship and then fall into to partisan traps um you know does job isn't debating Trump uh with people so I don't know that he's ever tried to like pull people away from the

“Trump world and and found common ground with them on that so he's I think he's usually more focused”

on you know people saying that uh black people are inferior and the like uh so he maybe just hasn't it hasn't been incorporated into his work heavily um Marlosa's I've had myself wondering how the left believe their intentions and policies are helpful to American citizens um am I experiencing

cognitive dissonance because I don't support a single thing they do uh did you catch the weave there well

yeah let's let's just pinpoint exactly your question Marlosa when you said American citizens I think a lot of the left uh tends to see themselves more as part of a global community and that increasingly and that explains why immigration under Biden happened as it did uh because they prioritize the well-being of the world ahead of the well-being of Americans and we should care about the well-being of the world but we can't balance every single other countries concerns

at the detriment of the American citizen uh and so this is like my steelman perspective on the left immigration policy is that they really believe um that borders are unjust um or you

“know the kinds of borders that we've had in this country are unjust um and you should have the”

freedom of movement uh you're citizen of the world you're born to the world not a particular country uh and alike uh Tom Hahn might argue that's actually a uh hyper-Christian argument um all have been in foster early glory of the god uh in the way that Christ you know versilized human dignity um so maybe some folks would make that argument which is interesting but uh I think really it's just the the globe is totally shrunk to a point where now everybody because of technology can see

what's happening around the rest of the world can it's is demanding we are demanded to think about the rest of the world at every given moment um and that can have an effect on the way we yeah of course the way we see the world uh so anyway uh I I see it more downstream of that then anything else all right let's see got a few more here yeah Hankson's uh Beauvard article in the American mind Rachel's national treasure I'll be a slightly obsessed treasure I love her writing and how she

knows the history of her specialty and how to explain it so a layman can understand yeah Beauvard wrote a great article for American mind on how the media botched its coverage of the save act debate go ahead check that out at americanmind.org it was fantastic I texted Rachel about it uh this

morning and she said it was literally her super bowl uh her her recall of senate history is just incredible

um great stuff all right uh Richard says uh says her chavez the lowest word to scandal here we go amazing how little attention this is getting yeah that's a good point unfortunately the activity is way too common in the Mexican-American migrant community um none our surprise because most families have experienced and buried it oh I'm so sorry um the goal of this story is not justice it's to cause the retreat the real question is who does the retreat benefit yeah Richard we talked

“about this a little bit last week uh I want to say it was unhappy hour when I said I think”

part of the reason it's easier for the left right now to discard Caesar Chavez is that he was against uh there's debate over how much this changed but he was for much of his career against illegal immigration because it was undercutting the wages of american citizen workers um who were Chicano so then it goes yeah many such cases on the left until uh rather recently so I think that's partially why people are a little bit trigger-happy on this one um I do think also to your point

migrant communities are really really vulnerable uh it's part of the reason why we shouldn't allow a system or we shouldn't have a system that allows for such wide scale human trafficking it's part of the reason why our system about asylum uh it's just allows people to be exploited sanctuary cities a lot people to be exploited um labor policies a lot people to be exploited um I don't I think actually there are different directions of the evarified debate even among hawks are there

different um that debate's actually pretty complicated but I will say so many employees relying on

risk becoming a culture in those advocacy communities because it's baked into the culture when

you have uh people dealing with so many uh people who are easily exploitable so uh yes it's an interesting point and I agree it's really not getting a lot of coverage either I feel like the left just wants to bury Caesar Chavez and move on um Rod Dreher who I mentioned earlier had a good rundown of MLK's problem on this front as well in his newsletter it would have been his Thursday newsletter so you can go check that out I'm right let's see what else do we have it looks like we have

a couple more um this is from this one's from Zach uh I live in South Carolina we're Senator Lindsey Blazing Guns Graham is for reelection he seems yet to have a viable primary challenger as a father with young boys I can't imagine supporting a candidate so war hungry as an american

“first conservative I feel like I don't have a party anymore what advice would you have to”

conservatives feel like the conservative movement went neocon overnight um yeah yeah it does seem like the tone of the last five years has been kind of thrown out the window and I'm just talking about the tone um yeah that was part of the conversation we had on the show many times with Trump and Iran meaning I think a lot of people took from him saying I'm not going to start new words I'm

going to end words well also being hawkish on Iran because he has been uh is basically that he

prioritized not starting new wars um and some people would still say that's true of him that he had to do this uh one of you wrote in earlier he had to do this uh when he did it uh I think Sue wrote that in earlier so I hear that argument uh too but it does feel like the tone has at least shifted uh we've gone to not so much talking about no new war is to defending what's was pretty clearly a new war for a while they were trying not to call it a war just refer to it as as uh what epic fury

but uh that's I think getting more difficult um because the president is referred to it that way and the like so anyway my advice um you're just as a journalist I can see how people calling offices and complaining works um you know you gotta make yourself competitive with the donors it's an uphill battle but the donors who are in the ear of people who have been in the senate for really long time those are the people who have their phone numbers and are texting them and calling

them um but you can balance that out by calling and writing in and the like uh that does really matter to the offices so if you're so inclined can't hurt uh to give the office to call have your friends give the office a call um to if you're involved at like the grassroots level local conservative groups conservative churches um you know to have those conversations with the the local movement if

“you're involved or if you want to get involved or if you've been thinking about it that can't hurt”

either um now it's it's really tough when someone's so entrenched like Lindsey Graham as he's had primary challenges over the years uh none of which and I think he has what Paul Dan's uh used at the Heritage Foundation challenging him and Paul Dan's is a somewhat polarizing figure on the

right um so I don't know I never see Lindsey Graham primary challenges as serious even as polarizing

as Lindsey Graham is on the right just because he is so entrenched uh people keep trusting him uh who have voted for him for years so I don't know I don't know maybe work on I guess maybe my advice is to to work on others who seem maybe persuadable because that's what happened frankly to Marco Rubio, JD Vance uh Marco Rubio changed his foreign policy and listen he's still very hawkish on Latin America that hasn't changed one bit that hasn't changed one bit but I watched this

happen up close in the Senate um he clearly rethought the full-throated neoconservatism that he had a spouse before uh he had people around him who were bringing up different issues different issues and the Trump movement I think did in some people inspire humility I think Rubio is one of them so you know I would say to you it also helps to call up persuadable members who might represent you in the house or in the Senate um that can't hurt either um and to you know have hope

that it will it'll change at some point down the line um again you know I tend to be more anti-interventionist um and part of it's just because like you know like everyone I hate war and I'm with born at a time where I saw the country and a lot of it and in a really unfortunate way

“and I know a lot of people were uh born before me uh or maybe born after me don't even remember that”

um but I think that that's probably collared my perspective on it um but you know I'm not totally anti-interventionist right like I'm not against literally everything um every every use of of military force there's certain certainly be a uh depending on how an invasion of time one went

uh but uh rather than just like rolling over but anyway yeah it's a uh I do think the the

GOP has to shift just because we're in 10 years as zoomers age and vote more and even younger people

“are voting and in the workforce it's just going to change so I think it's it's a transition period”

um this is from Dylan who asks if I have thoughts on David Brooks's Bobo's and paradise Dylan says I think he does a fairly sharp analysis of the boomer ethos um yeah I have I have read it uh to me I read it later I think I probably read it in 2017 so some of it just sounded like okay uh or probably 2018 maybe even when I read it and I think that was from let me go find the date on that um so I think it's probably fair to say it was pressure um you know let's see what

is the date yeah 2000 that was written in 2000 uh so you're probably fair to say it was pressure and he did have a front row seat to it uh in the American elite at the time but you I think also people forget that the conservative movement was talking about this um you know it wasn't just pat Buchanan, Ron Paul, Ross Peroe either um this was there there there were a lot of for years right the conservative movement was saying the media is snobbish, elidish, smug looking

down their noses uh at middle America and that was happening at the time so I don't know that maybe I'm just this maybe this is coke for not wanting to give uh David Brooks his due uh because

“David Brooks is obviously intelligent uh and compelling and interesting but I think maybe I just by”

the time I read it it all seemed so obvious I don't remember any specific criticisms of it other than that okay yep I get it um but anyway that's it's it's it's a good recommendation if you're interested

in the subject it's sort of like an essential read if you're into like the Charles Murray

Robert Putnam uh class-based social science Tim Cartney's alienated in America these are all books that people should definitely read uh let's see what else do we have I think we have one or two more Steven says if you're stranded I deserve to island it can only bring one meme what would it be that's a good one um maybe Jim Downey the Conan Jim Downey mean I love that one right where it's like someone gets identified in a really specific way and then you

put it into the meme and you're like um Donald Trump the celebrity apprentice host Donald Trump uh that's a really really weak example of it but um wait I did one the other week that I thought was pretty good this was yeah this was a Jim Downey mean where someone posted 2007 what a time and it was a screenshot of an article that Matt Iglesias we don't know Matt Iglesias he's the butt of a

lot of jokes online and has been for like basically his whole career he's sort of a new liberal

aggressive relentless centrist and owns all of the criticism of himself uh he came it came out of the blogging era and this was a him bragging about being named uh to one of playboys girls of the pack 10 issue like his blog was featured in playboys girls of the pack 10 issue and I used the Jim Downey mean said Matthew Iglesias the man whose blog was once featured in playboys girls with the pack 10 issue I don't even know how this one started I really don't know how now I'm explaining

and bragging about my own memes um unhappy I we've reached that portion of the podcast um I don't even know how that happened but like the meme I don't know how that happened but that is one of my absolute favorites absolute favorites so it might be the Conan Jim Downey meme there's so many good ones alright last question Katie says I'm genuinely confused about this and can't get a straight answer for anyone I went to the list post on the White House official site

about the history of the attacks by Iran on America for the last 50 years if you include all Iranian back terrorist groups get about 1100 Americans killed by Iran we called that many Iranians in June after the 12 day war and we started this war by mortgaring 170 school girls if you include

“all the groups we fact you need to include the Iranians killed by Saddam Hussein has a”

run-over attack us without provocation how does this constitute threat to us we could we could their government made them oh cool I think their government made them live under a dictator for decades a decade thanks to the hell of them and slaughtered over a hundred of the children and now we pretend to be the victims what am I missing Katie's echoing a pretty common sentiment that I've seen uh not that I've seen that everyone's seen I think from the left

Glen Greenwald that are great debate with Coleman Hughes on Coleman's conversations with Coleman podcast this week and Glen expresses a version of this um that I think is a pretty like

it's it's obviously complicated uh when you're nuclear power and you don't want there to be

other nuclear powers because you're the nuclear power and that threatens your power um and you also have now the quote death to America death to Israel ideology of a lot of people in Iran which again we in the British in the 1950s for what was a much more compelling reason at the time could help to assist in the coup of the Iranian government of most of the deck and yes there questions about most egg and whatever um but we did that uh because we didn't want someone working

with the Soviets and we were very paranoid about anybody working with the Soviets um you know whether it was in Argentina or Chile or Cuba or um I mean all of these Cold War conflicts in

“Donisia so carno um stem from that and sometimes it was paranoia at the time and I think this is”

where the the Cold War history of the left really does lose something the paranoia was much more compelling because nuclear it was was much more rational it's funny to say rational paranoia but it was much more rational because we were terrified we didn't have all the nuclear agreements that we have today although I think we should still be terrified of nuclear power um but we didn't have all that in place it was so brand new so brand new uh that nobody I mean it was it was a terrifying time

uh you kids doing the nuclear drills under the desks in school and the like so I think in the the

early stages of the Cold War it was much more rational but Iran never forgot that and it's what

led to 1979 because the Shah who you know I think it's probably reasonable say was probably

“better than the I told her on human rights still had a lot of human rights abuses uh under his”

leadership and people were furious and they saw him as an agent of the people who had could most of the egg and after that everything went to hell it's not completely surprising but in America nobody knows about the history of the fifties like the it's it's not that nobody knows about it because we just don't talk about it but that factors heavily in the Iranian mind um not everyone you know is continuously bothered by it or is continually bothered by it or thinks that it's

some reason to stick around with the IRGC but it weighs heavier on the Iranian mind that it's as the American mind um and to some extent they do see that as the original provocation the original provocation and it was about nationalizing oil it really goes back to that and so if you follow the trail the question of provocation becomes kind of semantic but it becomes interesting um and they're different perspectives on it historically and alike um this is the the far left sort of sees America

as the terrorist regime I don't um we commit war crimes um and because with the biggest power we do it on a big scale uh where we have historically done it on a big scale um bigger than other countries

where not as powerful but we are not a terrorist regime um our goal is not terror when it happens

people are punished now there have been some cases that haven't gone right uh but our legal system is built in a way that punishes war crimes um not to say we're perfect at doing that but our our legal system is built in that way it isn't our goal uh to visit terror upon other countries civilians it happens more than it should but it's not our goal um and that is the goal of terrorist

“groups and terrorist regimes so once a regime transitions to a terrorist regime uh then I think”

it the moral high ground is totally lost um but at the same time yeah some American history is white washed obviously American history is white washed uh there's there's no question about I think some of those things can be true at the same time and when it comes to Iran as well American history is white washed so yeah there you know that's it doesn't the story doesn't get told accurately um and I think the left miss is someone called war history I think the right miss is a lot

on cold war history and Iran is a good example of that so that topic could take up like hours but it's a good question Katie thanks so much for sending it in I appreciate it thank you to all of you for listening and sending in your comments to Emily at DevilMaker Media.com tell your friends to subscribe some of the clips from the show you can do that really easily on Instagram if you're a meme-fiend in the DM's like I am uh that's a good one that's uh the Instagram help sure the

great weekend god bless we'll see you back here with more on Monday