Words Matter: A Fiasco Wrapped In A Disaster Inside a Catastrophe

sub-basement of the Ministry of Snark in Washington, D.C. and from other undisclosed locations

across America and around the world.

“Hello and welcome to DSR's Words Matter, I'm David Rothkuff, joined this week as every week”

by the man you want to hear from, ornstein, savant, oracle, man who can tell the future, norm ornstein. He said, don't vote for Trump, look what happened, okay? You see what I'm saying, put to him two together, norm the president today, greeted the prime minister of Japan in the

Oval Office, somebody said to the president, hey, Mr. President, why didn't you tell the

prime minister about this? And the president said, well, you know about surprise, why didn't you guys tell me about Pearl Harbor? What a perfect analogy. So, there's a big debate on the internet, is this worse than when George H.W. Bush threw up in the lap of a Japanese prime minister,

“which is more embarrassing. So, this is your opportunity, you are there, you are at Pearl Harbor,”

what do you think? This is more embarrassing. But I do have to tell you one heroic and related story, which

is many years ago when my son Danny was six years old, we went to an AEI world forum

in Beaver Creek, Colorado, and very, what a dad. Yeah, very high altitude. We spent the day hiking around, and I clearly was not a good enough dad to give him enough hydration. The open with a dinner, and of all things, we were seated right next to former president Jerry Ford. And my son Danny was right next to Jerry Ford, his president Gerald Ford, when soon after the dinner started, without

saying anything, he jumped up and ran outside, and I ran out to join him, where he proceeded to vomit in the bushes. So, instead of even at that young age, doing what most kids would do, which is to puke in the lap of the former president, recreating the George HW Bush, seen in the different way. He averted this national embarrassment, and Trump cannot divert a national embarrassment, no matter how much he tries, and you started David by

saying, "Let's put two and two together." He couldn't add two and two together if his life depended on it.

“I think that's true. I think, you know, it does bear saying, "We're watching him every”

day during this crisis." And he was getting old anyway, and he's kind of slumping down, his head is syncing into his shoulders. He doesn't sit up straight anymore. His ankles are swollen. One of his hands is turned completely purple. You know, he's his brain is kind of mush. But this crisis seems to me to be bringing out the worst of him, because he does not know how to respond to things. He, you know, he has spent his life bullshitting

his way out of problems he's created. But he is just finding, he can't bullshit your way out of this kind of thing. He can't coordinate with the Israelis. They blow up stuff we don't know about. Obviously, the Iranians are going to do things on their own agenda. Our allies in the region are pissed off at him half the time, because of kicking this thing off for allies in Europe and in Asia pissed up. He's just, he's, he's, he's almost almost

normal. I'm not saying all the way, but I almost feel sorry for him. I don't. I feel sorry for the rest of us and for the world, because this is, of course, carining out of control. And while at the same time, we know he's getting pressure from a lot of people around him to just the clear victory and pull out. There is no guarantee that if he did that, that the Iranians would say, "Okay, you're gone. We're fine. We'll just reopen the

streets." And what we know is Israel is not ready to do that. And Israel has begun to

by bombing the oil refineries and other sites in the other Gulf states, which means that

“we are likely to face a substantial period of time with a major shortage in oil supplies”

and in fertilizer. Now, that's going to have a huge impact on the world. I was talking with an Asian-American friend of mine today, actually a doctor, who said he has relatives and others he knows, very poor people who rely on gas for heating their food. And they can barely pay for it. Take away the gas. We're going to have problems with hunger around

the world. Food prices are going to go up here because fertilizer prices are skyrocketing.

The travel of goods across the country in trucks relying on diesel fuel. Now, over $5 a gallon and the possibility that oil will go from $100 a barrel to $150 or even $200, leading

“to a global recession or worse, all because of these ignoramuses jumping into a war without”

having any clue what was likely to happen. And I have to say, David, watching God knows why I'm such a massacist, but watching Tulsi Gabbard and the other intelligence agency officials, including John Ratliffe, the head of the CIA, testify yesterday in front of the Senate, knowing that every intelligence assessment, every war game, everybody who's ever studied this region, and Iran, has said for decades if there is a war, they will close the

streets of Hormuz. And that was, of course, part of what was in our intelligence reports for years. We know that Trump, very possibly, was briefed on this, but whether he was or not, when

“he said, "Nobody knew that they would do this." And you have these lick spittles to”

Trump trying to avoid saying, "Well, of course, we all knew this. What's wrong with this guy?" It just made matters that much worse, because nobody's going to go to Trump and tell him, "Boy, have you screwed this up?" We've got to find a good way out of this. That's not happening. And Pete Hickseth, of course, going off on all of our allies and threatening them just makes it clear that this is getting worse. Plus, we have to have

the one other element, which is increasing intelligence telling us that the Russians are doubling down using their most sophisticated technology and their most sophisticated ability to amplify the role of these drones, to kill Americans and take out our vital assets. And what do we do? We give more to Russia. We do. We've given not only sanctions relief for people who buy oil from Russia, but we lifted

some sanctions on a couple of Russian oligarchs yesterday. We are lifting sanctions because Wittkov gets along with some of the Belarusians. The Russians are caching in while targeting Americans to kill them. And yes, go on. No, go on. I was just going to add. And you know, it makes it more and more clear what Trump's priorities are, including one other little aside here, which is we had another dignified transfer

of the bodies of American military personnel killed in this conflict. And the family said,

we want to do this quietly. We don't want any publicity. Trump basically gives the families

a middle finger and starts to put out on social media pictures of this because he thought it looked better because he didn't have his baseball cap on. And it tells you his priorities. His priorities aren't protecting American lives. His priorities aren't protecting our most vital intelligence assets and our bases in this tense region. They are giving more to the Russians and doing whatever he can to try and keep those oil prices from skyrocketing even more no matter

God help not just us but everybody else in this story world.

“To stay up to date on all the news that you need to know, there's no better place than right here”

on the DSR network. And there's no better way to enjoy the DSR network than by becoming a member. Members enjoying ad-free listening experience access to our discord community, exclusive content, early episode access and more. Use code DSR 26 for a 25% off discount on sign up at the DSR network.com. That's code DSR 26 at the DSR network.com/bi. Thank you and enjoy the show. No question about that. And I have to say as we look towards the future,

there are a number of signs that suggest things are are getting worse. You've talked about some

“likelihood of continued unrest, likelihood of rising oil prices, likelihood of shortages of fertilizer,”

likelihood of shortages of fuel consequences of that for the global economy from markets for recession and so forth. But there are even others. So the administration now is floating here in

Washington, the idea that they need a supplemental budget allocation of $200 billion. 20% of the

defense departments already bloated budget enough to spawn every social program in the United States for a long time. And when asked about this today, Donald Trump said, "Well, some of it's for this Iraq Iran War," excuse me. But some of it is for things that may come next. And all I can

“think of is, here he is seeking a supplemental and advanced for what Cuba, Greenland, you know,”

his next adventure. And I have to ask you, what are the odds that this supine Congress

gives him the money that he is looking for? I don't think he's going to get $200 billion,

part of the reason being that to give him $200 billion is acknowledging on top of it already wildly bloated budget for the Pentagon that they've increased dramatically, adding even more to our burgeoning debt. But a $200 billion appropriation for this ensures that this war goes on for a very long time. And I got to believe that at least Republicans enough Republicans are going to understand the implications of giving in the money and we'll cut it back. How much they'll cut

it back, I don't know. But, you know, the other thing of course that's happening here is that

we are rapidly depleting whatever stocks we have of many of the critical weapons that we want to

keep to prevent mayhem here at home, including Patriot missiles. Well, by the way, pegs that blame that on Joe Biden. Well, of course. And you blame everything on Biden, including I am sure every element anything that goes wrong gets blamed on Biden. And that'll be true even if they're still in the White House in two and a half years. If Trump is still alive and well. You know, when I first heard this warning that we might get drones attacking California

and the West Coast, I thought, what kind of nonsense is this? How insane are they? They're not going to have drones that can go 8,000 miles. But then I realize that there is actually a potential threat, which is sleeper cells or others that would have small boats off the coast of California. That could in fact be able to have a range that could reach the population areas there. We know that the Iranians have prepared for a very long time the revolutionary guards for some kind of

attack or invasion. And it's not just that they prepared by being ready to close the streets of Hormuz. Not that they were ready to take on their erstwhile neighbors and allies, some of the

barely scratch the surface on that. While we have, you know, almost everybody who was involved

“in counterterrorism, including the elite squad at the FBI, the cyber security areas at Homeland”

Security and elsewhere, and with a 22-year-old former grocery clerk being the chief on this kind of potential attack in this story administration, we all have to brace ourselves for what might be serious bloodshed at home. But you know, this was unsurprisingly borrowed up, you were talking about the hearings that Chelsea Gabbard in John Ratcliffe, also participating with Cash Patel or Confidence Inspiring Head of the FBI. And when I asked about firing these people, he said,

"Well, you know, I'll have to take your word for it. I didn't know they had anything to do with Iran." And so, again, you're a great scholar of the Congress, and I have to ask you a

“question. We have now entered, you know, sort of through the looking glass version of Congressional”

hearings, in which Trump administration officials come in, lie, obfuscate, attack the people who are asking them questions, avoid addressing any of the issues, completely undo this whole idea of congressional oversight. And yet, they seem to be getting away with it. I mean, it's gotten to the point where you can't watch a hearing and get an answer about any of the subjects of the hearing. You get weird shit. I mean, the Mark Wayne Mullin confirmation conversation yesterday in which he

got into a debate with Rand Paul about whether or not it was legal to engage in a duel in the United States was fucking weird. But I just have to ask you, you know, is art doesn't, don't, doesn't the minority side have any ability to get things back on track here? No. And it's because it's a cult. And until it goes much further south, I don't think we're going to be seeing more

than a couple of Republicans who are retiring, basically, willing to step up in any way, shape,

or form. And, you know, watching Mark Wayne Mullin in his tense show, we say exchange with Rand Paul, one other thing became clear to me, and it was pretty dismayed. Mark Wayne Mullin is, as I have said many, many times, the dumbest member of the Senate, and given the competition, Tommy Tuberville, Marsha Blackburn, Ron Johnson, that's saying something. He also, we know, is thoroughly corrupt. This is a guy who did stock trades using insider trading and made a ton of money.

And it was including, by the way, before this war started, yeah, you know, by doing stock trades and energy plays and things to cast in on it. Yeah, before it happened, he is also a serial liar. And if you watched any of the grilling of him about him saying that he had participated in a

“top secret mission where he knew the sights and smells and trauma of war, but wouldn't give”

any information about it and claimed he couldn't because it was classified. But said it was a congressional operation, and since Congress can't classify anything, he's just flat out lying. He goes through all of that. He shows this terrible anger management problem with his exchanges with Rand Paul, where he had called Rand Paul a snake, his own Republican colleague, where he had exalted in the fact that Paul was viciously attacked from behind by a neighbor and suffered

serious physical damage and would not apologize and basically gave a middle finger to the

chairman, Rand Paul, a member of his own party, saying, in effect, you don't deserve an apology because you're not Republican enough. And he did this because he knows that John Fetterman, the erstwhile Democrat, before this hearing happened, announced that he would be voting for Mark Wayne Mullham, which meant that Mullham didn't have to worry about his confirmation getting stuck in the committee that he had the votes because of John Fetterman. This is a man

including frequently on CNN, where he has done nothing but a apologize for all of the actions

that Trump has taken, defended the utterly indefensible, Trump likes that and basically knows that

“he will do anything that Trump wants and that's why he's picking him for this post and he will”

make it through in a Senate that's utterly feckless and that gets back to your question. Is there anybody there who can block him, where they can pull together enough votes to make it work? And the answer now into the foreseeable future is tragically no. Let me play a little name association with you here because you've touched upon some of them that I have some interest in because of the news

of the week. But let me start with John Fetterman. I mean, this guy is so damaged. He's certainly

not a Democrat anymore. He doesn't even make any pretense of it. It's, you know, he claims he

“still a Democrat he'll never become a Republican, but he does nothing except criticize Democrats”

and praise Republicans. Now I'll give him one small thing. He at least announced yesterday that he could not support the so-called Save America Act, which he had endorsed before because he said, who could be against voter ID? Somebody at least clearly was able to sit him down and tell him

what's actually in this bill, which has almost nothing to do with a voter ID. It's pure voter suppression.

But that aside, he is a now a reliable vote for Republicans. I've heard at least one suggestion made that the only person he's listening to at the moment is a brother-in-law who's full on mega. I do know having tried to get other Democrats in the Senate to talk to him, to talk to him about the negotiations with the administration over ice and the border patrol to try and get them to abide by the constitution and the law and about the Save Act. And the response I've gotten back

is he won't talk to any of us. So I suspect he's also talking to some of the Republicans. They're treating him really nicely, and he likes that. But this is a damaged man. And unfortunately, he's going to be in the Senate for the next three years. Well, someone who may or may not be in the Senate for the next three years is John Coran. John Coran and was sort of forced to sort of embrace the Save Act in order to get the endorsement of Donald Trump against Paxon in the Texas Republican

Senate primary, but the date for one candidate or the other dropping out his past, the president hasn't provided that endorsement. Do we think we're going to see Coran and continue to cow-tow and, you know, more broadly, what's your current prognosis on the Save Act? I expect that he will continue to cow-tow. He is still very concerned about the possibility of Trump endorsing his opponent, Ken Paxton, who is, you know, speaking of competitions may be the most corrupt

public official other than Trump in America, although admittedly Howard Lotnick Steve Woodcoff

“and too many others are competition for him. And, you know, I remember back in the previous”

Congress when we had these discussions about changing the filibuster, nobody was more passionate about protecting the filibuster than John Coran, nobody talking about the traditions of the Senate and how much it meant in history and as soon as he faced this election challenge from Ken Paxton, he doesn't up at saying, well, we got to ditch the filibuster to get the Save Act. So willingness that even people like John Coran, I happened to know John Coran and well, I worked with him

going back in the days and years after 9/11 on continuity of government, he was thoughtful, strong and understood the issues and dealt with them. I enjoyed working with him then

but he is sold his soul now to stay in office and that's shameful.

“Well, but to the second half of the question, Save Act prognosis at the moment.”

In the short run, they are not going to be able to change the rules to make it happen.

What I would tell you is to keep in mind two other things, David. The first is

if this war goes even worse, as it is likely to, if Republicans blame Trump even more and you probably seen that viral clip of a Trump voter, when asked what would you say to him now, said he's a piece of shit, I voted for him three times and what an idiot I was. That may not be universal or even typical now of that base, but you can imagine a lot more people turning not just on Trump but on Republicans and if they believe that their

“majority is going to disappear and maybe even not just by one vote but by more than that,”

they'll change the rules. The second though is if they don't change the rules,

sometime in the near future, we're going to have another budget reconciliation bill. Most of our viewers and listeners have followed this enough to know what budget reconciliation is, at least in its basics. It is the one way in getting through a bill involving spending and taxes that can be done on an expedited basis and requiring only a simple majority in the Senate, 50 votes. All of these huge tax cuts in the past were done using budget reconciliation,

actually the Affordable Care Act as well, other pieces of legislation.

But it's supposed to be in the rules in the law, in the Budget and Opponent Control Act in 1974, that created this process restricted to things that involve spending and taxing and that are not allowed or supposed to be allowed to increase the deficit. extraneous things where the primary purpose is not appropriations or taxation are not allowed under the rules and every time we have one of these budget reconciliation bills come up, they have to vet it through the Parliamentarian who tells

them what's allowable and what isn't. This will not be allowable the save act. However, it can be challenged on the floor when somebody brings up an amendment to include the Save America Act. The Parliamentarian says that's out of order because it's not allowable and then under the Senate rules any Senator can appeal the ruling of the chair and a simple majority can overrule the Parliamentarian. It is violating their own rules up and down. But don't

discount the possibility that they will do it this way knowing that whether it's a violation of their own rules or even a violation of that Budget and Opponent Control Act, no court is likely to challenge it. Our only hope in the courts is that it will be knocked down or a good part of

“it knocked down because it's a poll tax. Well, that's what I was getting at, you know, the rules of”

elections are to be made by the states are they not and aren't some of the elements of the Save Act overreaching. They're vastly overreaching and the parts that require proof of citizenship to include a passport passport card or certified birth certificate, all of which if you do not have them in your possession cost, significant sums of money are the equivalent of a poll tax. So it's entirely possible that that could be struck down by the courts. Now, if they pass this, however,

they will make each of these elements separable, meaning the court can strike out one part, but not necessarily the whole thing. And at least as pernicious, maybe even more so because the fact is the Plenty of Republicans disenfranchised if they don't have or can't afford a passport or find their birth certificate, much less pay for a new certified copy. But remember, this bill

voter information and to use a voter purge program created by Doge using social security data,

“which they have stolen the privacy of all Americans and which will disenfranchise millions”

of citizens who will find it almost impossible to get back on the voter rules and it doesn't require that citizens be notified if they've been struck from the voter rules until they go to the polls and are being told, "No, sorry, you were struck because you are not a citizen." Yeah, I'm a citizen, too late, too bad. That's the problem with this bill. If it gets enacted, we're in a heap of trouble. I don't know if it would be enough, given what's likely to be this

enormous backlash against these horrible people who are blowing up the world and blowing up

most of our values at home. But it would be a big hurdle if it ends up getting through in any

“way, I'm sure. With Amazon, more than 50% of the population with less population,”

in the same way, in the paper-treatment, or even more, in the same way, if there's still a lot of population. If there's still a lot of population, how do you deal with your nine copies with the current and the population of the population, which is based on Amazon population data from the year 2005 to the European Union and the EU? Do you have any more questions about working with the US from 1900 or the

technology from gestern? Then come to Newwork Evolution and a decade the Arbeitsweiter Zukunft.

Agile Arbeitsmethoden, Vielfalt, Moderna Arbeitsculture and Flexibilität, diversity, and much more. The Newwork Evolution, from five to seven months, 2020 in the Messe Karlsruhe, yet it gets sichern. Yeah, although it isn't likely that one other thing that would happen is that this would get challenged a thousand ways in a thousand courts and that some of this stuff would just simply not be implementable before the election. I think it's reasonable to make that

assumption. The more they can keep this from happening until a point where it is too late, because the election rules and the ballots have been set and codified and states have already prepared.

“But then you have to put a pass this Supreme Court to go along with their own, what's called”

the Purcell rule that you don't change the rules to close to an election. And it's not clear to me that they would abide by that if it meant that their partisan friends would be enhanced in their likelihood of winning by violating their own standards. Well, I don't have unlimited amount of time each week to trigger you, although I'm wish I did. But as you bring up that, I'd like to bring up one last thing because as I've read it, I thought I really look to see norms reaction to this.

And that was John Roberts, indignantly saying that people shouldn't criticize the justices. You know, if you have problems with the opinions that's fine, but don't be mean to the justices. And I just, I could just only imagine you having a minor neurological incident as you read this. And I was just wondering if I was correct. I got to use the famous phrase, "Shipilcus in the Genecta-Gazoid" over this. John Roberts, who unleashed Donald Trump,

John Roberts, singularly responsible for creating an out-of-control dictator. John Roberts, who achieved his goal of the unitary executive, now finding that the monster he unleashed. You know, as I watched the clips of the movie Frankenstein up for an Academy Award for Best Picture, I just thought of John Roberts's Dr. Frankenstein creating this version of Donald Trump. Trump goes off on truth social with an out-of-control rant against Roberts in the court.

And now it's Roberts saying, "How can you say that about me and us?" So, if you'll pardon the language, fuck 'em all. I mean, they're all just people who have dug deep into the ground to create a grave for our constitutional system. And, you know, the idea that now you want to step up and say, "Where's the respect for our court?" I forget about it.

But before we go, let's point out your latest piece in the Daily Beast,

“built on your decades of experiences of foreign policy guru in the situation room at times,”

watching the globe, and trying to put this war against Iran into context. Everybody should read it. Well, you're very kind to say this. And weep. But you'll read it, and weep, because what we're doing now, certainly qualifies as among the stupidest things we've ever done.

It's too early to say whether it's among the most damaging things we've ever done.

But when you look at the list of the most damaging things we've ever done, and this is a bit of a

“spoiler for people who are going to read the article, you know, you have yet an om, you have the”

Iraq war, you have other mistakes that we may have made throughout our history. I once read historians felt the biggest mistake that we made was not annexing Canada when we had the choice in the

19th century, but and I'm sure Trump would agree with that. But if you look at

actions that have been taken by the United States that have damaged our standing, hurt our national security, produced innocent deaths, produced unnecessary costs, nothing compares with electing Donald Trump. It has been the most damaging blow to our standing and our security and our leadership role and our alliances around the world and to our allies and to tens of millions of people are going to die around the world because of short-sighted, foolish decisions

made by Trump, by Musk, by Doge, by Rubio, by Heggseth, and others. And so I just thought I would put it in perspective. You can go to the Daily Beast and read that. And of course, you can keep following us here on the DSR network, subscribe on YouTube or subscribe to become a member of the DSR network by going to the DSR network.com. And know that you're on the show with the bid momentum last week's show with Mary Trump was the highest rated show we've ever done. We are approaching,

“I think we're approaching 250,000 downloads on YouTube of that show. And so, you know, it's not,”

it's not as big as some of the big big biggies, but it's up there. And it's all because you're very well dressed, very handsome man. You are the well-dressed one. So, buddy, we're tricks, things that was the same boy. We're wearing our quarterzips, our shirts, we're sitting here, it's warming up outside. We're like, "Well, we've got to stay warm, it gets any way." It's a pleasure and I look forward to joining you again next week. And of course, join us for

everything else right here on the DSR network until then. Thanks, Nuron. Thanks, everybody. Bye-bye. That's not how much you're doing.