Trump Puts Bibi in His Place & Neocon Heads Implode Over Peace in Iran. Tucker & Piers Morgan React.

The absolute macht is the one who has to live.

“Your Reich will be unbezzling what is in the ring.”

Stream the new Staffel, House of the Dragon, at 22nd June, with Woho, a member of Staffel 1 and 2 of the previous series, and a member of the Highlights.

It's not a second question.

I'm going to tell you the truth. The best price for the best price. Now at 2 or 8 90 months. Gear of Worte for the E, Streaming was also not so good. In your mind's eye, you imagine the American Empire

ending someday, probably in like a conflagration, in some sort of conflict with another great power. If you had to pick one, you would imagine the end might come, you know, dispute over Taiwan. Finally, for most of the island of mainland China,

that might try to consider part of its country. There's been a dispute about this for almost 80 years. The United States has sort of informally suggested that it would defend Taiwan's sovereignty, and periodically that part of the world sells China sea,

pops into the news and you think, wow,

“that could be a big deal if, you know, we actually had a war”

with China because every year they get stronger. They now have to pick a economy that hours, and you can kind of imagine some reckless American leader destroying American power over Taiwan.

But you probably never imagine that the end of American Empire

would come in a little over a hundred-day conflict with a little rogue state on the Persian Gulf that has the 34th largest economy in the world, a country called Iran, which generations of Americans have been raised to believe as crazy and dangerous,

but basically irrelevant and certainly not civilized, in a no way capable of affecting America's place. In the global hierarchy, just couldn't imagine that would happen. But something like that apparently has happened, and we know, because we know how the text of the MOU,

the memorandum of understanding between the United States and Iran, that, unless something happens, is going to be signed in two days this Friday, in Switzerland by both countries. Now, versions of this have been circulating for the past three days,

and earlier today, apparently on background,

“members of the Trump administration read the 14 points”

in the MOU to a bunch different supporters at a bunch of news organizations. They immediately appeared online, and you read this, and you think that can't really be real. And then within the last hour, sources in Iran

released their version of the MOU, and it turns out to be identical to the one that members of the administration, these unnamed officials, gave to American reporters. So both countries releasing the same text of the agreement,

therefore you can't be certain, really, of anything, but you can be highly persuaded. You can consider it overwhelmingly likely that this document is real. At least as of right now, this MOU is real.

14 points to be signed on Friday. It's pretty short, and it's worth reading, at least in part, because it tells you everything, not just about how this war might end. It's not ended yet, but how it could end,

but it tells you even more about the relative place of the United States and Iran in the global order going forward,

and it's really kind of an amazing document.

And to get right to the point, you can see why Neo-Cons are upset. I mean, they have caused to be upset, not taking their side, but just being honest here. Wow.

Here's part of what it says, paragraph one. The United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran, and their allies in the current war, by signing this MOU, declare the immediate and permanent termination

of military operations on all fronts, common, including Lebanon, and undertake from now on, not to initiate any war or any military operation against each other, and to refrain from the threat or use of force against each other,

and ensuring the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon. The final deal will confirm with permanent termination of war on all fronts, including in Lebanon. Okay, so that's the first paragraph of the agreement,

Israel is not mentioned, but Lebanon is mentioned three times Lebanon, what is Lebanon have to do with this war? Well, strictly speaking, nothing, and when it began on February 28th, we were told by the administration,

this was purely about disarming Iran, it preventing this rogue terror state from getting nuclear weapons, which would be Primaphacia threat to the world. But very shortly after this war commenced,

Israel said, oh wait, we're going to take this opportunity, not to achieve the goals that they convinced President Trump to tell our nation about, but instead, to do something we've wanted to do for a long time,

which is steel southern Lebanon. And so very shortly after this war began, Israel started a new war with American weapons, paid for by American taxpayers, designed to take land from Lebanon,

which kind of bisects the country diagonally,

“and then starts hitting Bay Route on the Mediterranean,”

an ancient and beautiful city, maybe the most beautiful city in the world, and Israeli war planes started blowing up civilians in the middle of Bay Route. Well, the United States was occupied, tied down really,

both fighting this war that Israel inspired. We followed Israel's lead into the war, according to the Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and tied up defending mainland Israel from the response to that war from Iran.

And Israel takes this opportunity to use our money to start a new war to steal land.

So this agreement addresses that in the very first paragraph.

So well, a lot of people in America didn't even notice was happening around focused on it. And so in order to get everything else that follows in this agreement, the United States will have to restrain Israel, pull back from Lebanon,

stop killing civilians and Lebanon, and give back the land that you stole while the rest of us were paying attention to the Iran war. Wow, that's the first paragraph. And apparently, the U.S. is going to sign this.

The paragraph, too.

“The United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran”

undertake to respect each other's sovereignty and territorial integrity and to refrain from interfering in one another's affairs. Eternal affairs. Why is it significant?

Well, because the United States is addressing the Islamic Republic of Iran not as a rogue terrorist state, the Third Reich reconstituted in the Middle East, but as a normal country.

In fact, as a powerful sovereign country,

whose internal affairs will be, as a matter of record and agreement treaty, unlisted. Because you don't interfere in the internal affairs in powerful countries.

And so basically, this is acknowledging paragraph 2 before we even get to the straightforward moves in the nuclear program and all the rest. This document is acknowledging that Iran is not a rogue terrorist state.

Iran is a sovereign nation. In fact, a great power. Because it's negotiating with the world's greatest power of the United States. And the United States is acknowledging that, hey,

you have a right to run your country as you like. And so that means almost 50 years of watching reports on television about how Iran is an out of control, theocracy that murders Gays for being gay and prevents women from getting educated

or whatever they've been telling you.

We're okay with that now. Because you're a great power.

“And if you want to throw Gays off buildings,”

it's not really our business. Let's quite a change, whatever you think of it. paragraph 4. Immediately upon signing this MOU, the United States for America will begin

the removal of its naval blockade and any disturbances or impediments against the Islamic Republic of Iran and will fully end the naval blockade within 30 days. Retreat.

Pull your troops out. Get your warships out of this area. Stop hustling us. That's not a victory. That's a surrender.

That's retreats pullback. Just to fact, whether you like it or not. And to be clear, this is better than the alternative, not complaining about it. Just noting that, wow.

This is not unconditional surrender by Iran, hardly. paragraph 5. Upon signing this memorandum of understanding, the Islamic Republic of Iran

will make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels with no charge for 60 days only for the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman and vice versa.

In other words, they're going to open the straightaway for MOUs and not charge anybody anything for a month. And at that point, we'll talk. But Iran's going to talk not to the United States.

But to the saltmate of Oman, which would be the country directly across the straight to the south, the oldest monarchy in the world, Iran and Oman will determine

the terms on which shipping flows through the straight. Because after all, they're the two countries on either side, the north and south sides of the straight, so like it would be up to them.

You know, it's not up to the United States. Which has effectively controlled the Persian Gulf for your entire life. But not anymore. Now it's up to Iran and Oman

and their allies or regional partners. The other five GCC countries may be Iraq at the western end, who knows, but not the United States. And by the way, not China or Russia either,

but the two countries whose territory touches the straight to form MOUs there in charge now. And by in charge, that means in charge of, in effect, the Persian Gulf. Because the overwhelming majority of the commodities

mostly oil and gas, but not just oil and gas, fertilizer sulfur, the rest, you've heard so much about for the last 100 days, flow through that straight.

at least an equal partner with Oman

“in determining how much it's going to cost,”

the rest of the world to get their commodities out of the Persian Gulf. How much oil producing gas producing nations will pay to get their commodities out of the Persian Gulf Iran. That was not true on February 27. Apparently it's going to be true into the future.

So that power, the power to determine who gets their commodities out of, the most energy-dense region on the planet, by definition, makes you into a major player, if not a regional hedge-em-on. You're certainly a big deal.

As a rogue terrorist state, at that point, because you control, in effect, a fifth of the world's oil and gas. Okay, now. And it goes on. Paragraph six.

The United States of America undertakes with its regional partners to develop a definitive, mutually agreed upon plan with, at least USD 300 billion for the reconstruction and economic development of the Republic of Iran. Not just the reconstruction.

Not just rebuild the things that you blew up, but help our economy going forward. Economic development. The U.S. has done a lot of that around the world. Or said it does a lot of that around the world,

and it has to some extent.

But never in Iran, that since the late 1979,

when it's proxy, the shock abuted, and Iran has been, you know, a kind of top enemy in the world ever since, and now the United States will somehow be involved in raising a fund $300 billion. When this was leaked two days ago,

most people, including me, assumed that this was disinformation. It was a lie spread by opponents of the agreement. As a kind of poison pill, like no way.

“$300 billion isn't that like bigger than the entire Iranian economy?”

Can't remember, but it's in that range anyway. That can't be real. Now, U.S. officials, including the Vice President, have said, "We're not." That's not coming from American taxpayers, and that's probably true.

That would be very hard to sell. But it's coming from somewhere, and apparently, according to agreement, the United States will be involved in procuring the money putting together the fund who knows.

But it says right there, the U.S. is part of this. Huh, paragraph seven. The United States of America undertakes to terminate all types of sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran. Including the UN Security Council resolutions,

the IEA Board of Governors resolutions, and all unilateral sanctions, primary and secondary in the agreed upon schedule as part of the final deal. Maybe the most significant and most difficult to achieve point out of the 14 ending the sanctions.

“Now, those sanctions have been in place in one way or another”

for generations. They've crushed the economy of Iran,

and they are, as sanctions always are,

an act of war, soft war. But an act of war that kills people, kills kids through poverty, through starvation, always. And everywhere, sanctions kill people.

Now you could make the case that the people being killed deserve it. I guess. But you can't claim it's anything other than an act of war, but Americans, for generations, have not had to face that reality.

And occasionally, you'll see some report from some liberal own international groups, sanctions kill, and everyone, except liberals in the United States, everyone sort of doodily ignores it. Sanctions seem like a really easy, low-cost, non-violent way

to impose our will on other countries, and we always do them under the pretext of a moral crusade. You're getting sanctions because you're like Hitler. And if we didn't impose sanctions, we'd be like Chamberlain. And we don't want to be at peasers.

We want to be like Churchill, strong, and morally clear. We want to be the right side of history. We're good people. That's why we're sanctioning you. And Americans have, the Congress has used that justification

to sanction a whole bunch of different countries. And in no case, have those sanctions help the United States, at all, in fact, they've done more than anything else to weaken the U.S. dollar. Long-term, they were impoverished the United States,

those sanctions. There's no question about that. That's been acknowledged for a long time. But they've continued because no one has really pushed back, because no one could.

And now Iran, apparently, has successfully,

and if it happens, it'll be the first time at the scale

that it's ever happened, has pushed the U.S. to roll back those sanctions. Now, there is a long distance between putting that in a paragraph seven of the MOU, which not even signed yet, and actually happening.

Apparently, it's going to have to go through the Congress. Will that work? Hard to know, hard to believe. But the fact that it's even up for discussion,

tells you that this is the biggest change diplomatically well in memory, at least,

incredible that they actually wrote this down.

Paragraph 8, that we till the 8th paragraph at a 14, the Islamic Republic of Iran reaffirms that it shall not procure or develop nuclear weapons. Now, keep in mind, the whole point of this, we were told, was to stop their nuclear weapons program,

which didn't actually exist.

“They had a nuclear program, was there nuclear weapons program?”

Maybe? Why wouldn't it be who doesn't want nuclear weapons? France has nuclear weapons, Pakistan does. I mean, everyone wants nukes. We're all supposed to get treated like this.

But was Iran actually building a nuclear weapon? There's no evidence of that. In fact, there's quite a bit of counter-veiling evidence that they weren't at the moment. Well, they now, of course, they will.

Who wouldn't? You don't see Trump or Lindsey Graham? Or Ted Cruz standing up and saying, "We need to invade North Korea. We can't. They have a nuke."

So we treat them with respect, despite the fact the leader is very short. We treat them with respect. Because they have a nuke. So the incentive to get nuclear weapons is overwhelming,

“and all things being equal, countries that can get them will.”

And Iran is no different, but this does. Let's be honest. Makes it a lot more likely they will, because among other things, they'll be able to afford it, which brings us to paragraph 10.

The United States of America undertakes that immediately upon the signing of this MOU, and until the termination of sanctions, the U.S. Department of Treasury will issue waivers for the export of Iranian crude oil, petroleum products,

derivatives, and all associated services, including banking transactions, insurance, transportation, et cetera. Now that sounds technical,

but it is an incredible departure from where we were yesterday.

Where again, we are at the end stage of a multi-decade effort to isolate Iran in the world to make even going to Iran as a tourist, verboten. You can, by the way, be prosecuted for spending money in Iran, so subjector, they do all these sanctions.

“That this announcement that, oh, we're getting rid of all that stuff,”

and like they can do banking, and companies can do business with them, and they can export their oil, and they're not going to have to put it into unmarked tankers and pretend it came for somewhere else. This is a sea change that, again, connects to the other paragraphs in one way.

In a way, it treats Iran like a global power, like a sovereign adult nation, not like a rogue terrorist state, just the opposite. It treats Iran with respect. It treats Iran like a nation to be reckoned with.

And afford its sovereignty. Incredible. Paragraph 11. And we'll stop after this. The United States of America undertakes to make fully available for use.

The frozen or unrestricted funds of the Islamic Republic of Iran upon the implementation of this memorandum of understanding. So there are many billions of dollars that belong to Iran that have been frozen, in some cases since 1979, in banks around the world.

And Iran has consistently, without getting boring about it, demanded the return. This was a sticking point during the famous Obama Iran deal. Iran wanted its money back.

And in some cases, they never got it back.

The United States just ignored its promise to return the money. But it's Iran's money. They think about it quite a bit. It's not a rich country. Number 34 in the GDP list as noted.

And they want their money back. And within Iran, this is considered a really significant question. And it's also, of course, a matter of national pride. It's their money. Why can't they have it? Because it's in US dollars. That's why.

So with this, they would be getting their money back. So there's kind of no lying about this. This is maybe good for the United States. Long-term, you could certainly argue that. And one hopes it will be one praise that it will be.

It'll be better than what we have now. That's for sure. But it is impossible. From this text, assuming this is real, and we think that it is, it is absolutely impossible to say this is in any sense of win for the United States because it's not.

This is a pretty humiliating loss for the United States. And as an American, certainly not gloating about that at all. This is a loss. This is, by the way, the reason that you wouldn't want to start this war in the first place, because it could only end as it has ended.

And the people, by the way, who pushed to start this, notably the Israelis and their unregistered agents in the United States, knew that. Of course, because diminishing the United States and reducing its footprint and power and influence the Middle East was part of the plan.

If you're taking orders from a foreign power, that would be us, the US.

“And the Israelis wanted us out to the one that's out of the Gulf.”

They wanted the destruction of our bases in the Gulf, and they got it. But what they didn't want, what they definitely didn't want, was a resolution in which the United States, their patron, their only remaining ally on the planet, admitted out loud that, hey, actually,

Iran is a real country that will have a sea of the table going forward. It's an ancient civilization. You can eliminate it. We just tried, didn't work. And henceforth, we're going to treat them as not just a real place,

but a steward of the most economically significant waterway on the planet. So, with this, no matter what happens, even if this is not signed, on Friday, with this, the United States has officially acknowledged that Iran is a player. And that changes everything in the same way that the 1956 Suez crisis,

“another crisis, another war over a narrow waterway”

through which commerce flows ended the British Empire. Now, of course, you could argue the British Empire really kind of ended

with the armistice in 1918 at the end of the First World War.

You could definitely argue that it was done by 1945, when they air quotes now, one World War II. But like a lot of fading empires, it wasn't obvious to the rest of us, so there was muscle memory involved, and Britain had ruled the world, and so it was fading, but not dead.

But in the space of a very short period of time with that, fairly complex crisis, Britain was done. Why? Because in the Suez crisis of 1956, Britain made it really clear that no matter what they said or wanted,

they couldn't actually affect the outcome. They didn't have the power to settle things the way they wanted. The U.S. did. And so America, maybe not formally, but certainly practically, took Britain's place as the ruler of the Middle East.

With this, the United States has shown that it does not have despite possessing the world's best or biggest or certainly most generously funded military does not have the military power to impose its will on the 34th biggest economy in the world. That is not a lesson that we're going to take decades to come to.

That is an extremely obvious conclusion. In fact, that is the obvious conclusion of this document. Again, for good or bad, and there's something poignant about it, there's something sad about it, or something also bitter about it, considering it was predictable.

This is why people opposed a regime change war against Iran,

because this was always going to happen.

Because the question of Iran's military might, its nuclear program is ballistic missiles, was always secondary to what really mattered about Iran, which was its geography. It sits on the northern side of the Strait of Formus. It could close the Strait with mines.

It's not that hard. And because of where it sits on the globe, Iran was, and now is universally acknowledged as a powerful nation as a real place. It's not Somalia. And it never will be Somalia.

And this makes it official. So how do we get here? We didn't get here because any one of the administration decided, hey, let's sign a deal that our last remaining political allies, the Neocons, hate.

And they have every reason to hate this for sure. To extend them not grace necessarily, but just to be honest about what's happening. They're upset for good reason. The administration didn't do this to alienates

its last remaining pocket of supporters. Now it did this because we had no choice.

“The two things you need to understand about the American negotiating position right now are these.”

One, we're running out of weapons. The United States has expended about half of all of its existing missile defense in seven weeks. Half of its fad interceptors gone. So at a certain point, you can have whatever intention you want, but if you can't defend yourself against ballistic missiles or even drone attacks,

and you can't defend your allies in the region from those attacks, you can't continue. We have reached the limit of our industrial capacity. The United States actually can't defend itself as of right now. In a major conflict, we're assuming this is a less than major conflict.

It is Iran after all, it's not China, it's not Russia.

despite having a $1.5 billion-dollar-year Pentagon budget,

“because it doesn't have the industrial capacity to replenish those stocks.”

So we are very vulnerable at this moment, and with every passing day become more vulnerable. Okay, that's the first thing to know. The second thing to know is that gas prices have gone up a lot. Six bucks for 93 octane in a lot of places,

more than that for non-ethanol, for the privilege of using non-ethanol gasoline. That doesn't wreck your motor. They could go a lot higher than that. Brent crude prices, as the president said the other day, have actually not skyrocketed.

Well, one of the reasons they have is because the United States and other countries,

especially China, have massive oil reserves,

ours is called the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. And the U.S. government draws down on that in order to keep prices from going crazy, from spiking, because that's politically scary.

“And by the way, it's real, as an economic factor, it can spur real inflation.”

Our strategic petroleum reserve is that it's lowest point since 1983. In 43 years, right now. So, we are running out of oil, and we're running out of weapons. And it's not because we were beaten in some sort of, you know, broadside artillery exchange between aircraft carriers.

We famously destroyed their Navy in their Air Force, which most people didn't know existed, but it doesn't matter. Because the kind of conflict that is actually taking place is a symmetrical, and we have reached the limit of our ability to fight it. Short of using weapons of mass destruction against Iran,

which no normal person wants. Many people on television want, but no normal person wants that. Not just because it's the most immoral thing you could do, but because the downstream consequences are unimaginable. So, we actually don't have a choice.

The Trump administration is boxed in. We lost in a meaningful way. And this is probably, well, not great for the United States. In fact, devastating in some ways less bad, less devastating that what would happen if we continued.

And it's very clear that the Trump administration has understood this for a long time within days of the beginning of the war back in February. Why? Because, as is now widely understood, the administration, the president, believed, is really estimates about Iran's nuclear program.

It's strength and critically how it would respond to the decapitation of its leadership class. Kill the Iatola, kill the top 150 guys in charge of running the government and the military and the place will collapse and something good will happen. That was the pitch. And it turned out to be wildly, comically wrong.

The Iranians who were whatever else they are not stupid had thought this through and had created a system that was impervious to decapitation. You kill the first 150 and other 150 rise up to take their place. Probably a little more radical than the ones you just killed, but certainly clear about what their task is.

So, there was never going to be regime change on the cheap.

regime change would require a land invasion of Iraq. And there is no stomach for that in the United States. There's never been majority support for any kind of war with Iran. Any kind of war with Iran in the United States. And if by the way, if you cared about the promise of democracy, that would be a stumbling block for you.

But the advocates of this don't care at all with the public things, with their children die, not of interest to them. In any case, the Trump administration knew very early that this was not going to produce the easy win that these rallies had promised. And there's a lot of evidence that the president was angry about that.

Now, we've spent the last 100 or so days listening to him trying to posture his way out of it, threatening Iranians into submission. It didn't work. But underneath it all, it's very obvious that the president who's decision this was, by the way, and it's unfair to pass the book to Netanyahu.

He's not the president of the United States, but it's very clear that the U.S. president blamed Netanyahu from misleading him.

“And that's why, who's a very obvious and retrospect.”

He sent the Secretary of State out within days to say publicly in a stairwell in the U.S. Congress, that we followed Israel into this war, Trump blamed Netanyahu early. And he continues to. So what's the response from the people who pushed this war, including the ones who called Trump personally on the phone and there are many of them,

who called them on the phone, or who used their purchase on Fox News to convince him to do this, what's their response to this settlement? Well, it's completely hysterical, but it's also revealing of their motives.

So here's just one among many examples from Fox News. This is from two days ago. This was before we got the actual text of the MOU. This is when it's basic deal points were being shared by text. And it wasn't clear how many were real, but it was pretty clear this was not a triumphant victory.

And it was even more clear that the current Iranian regime would remain in place by the end of it. Here's the response from a Fox News contributor to the deal. Watch. This deal and everything that we know about it, to the degree that it is being spun in public by this, you know, and behind the scenes by the administration, everything about this deal seems bad to me.

It all seems bad. It all seems like a setback. It doesn't seem like it meets any of the measures that the president actually put out there of his goals when it came to this conflict. And look, at some point, this Republican party needs to decide which kind of foreign policy

it's going to have. Is it going to be an America-first foreign policy when that is bold that uses American power

“in clean moments decisively in order to affect what it wants to achieve?”

Or we can just backslide into being some kind of Hillbilly Obama kind of GOP. That is not something that is acceptable to me. It should not be acceptable to Republicans, and it should not be acceptable to any conservative who is interested in the success of America going forward.

It's amazing to see that if you're one of the overwhelming majority of Americans who don't

pay for a cable package and you're sort of wondering, why are leaders doing these things? Because they're watching stuff like that, and they take it seriously. So you put someone on television who has no knowledge whatsoever of the region as it has been there. It doesn't understand it.

It's taking almost all of his understanding of it from Fox News. You have the snake eating its tail. It's the guy who's believing the lies that he's ingesting and then coming to absurd conclusions on the basis of them. So it's like someone who's no authority to weigh in on this is telling you his August view of it.

So there's that. It's childish. But then there's the deeper question of, okay, you don't like the deal. What's the option? What does victory look like?

President articulated it pretty clearly. He wanted regime change. He wanted new people running Iran. He wanted an end to support for the proxies, the terror proxies. Hamas and his balan, the hoothies.

Okay. He wanted Iran to stop producing apparently ballistic missiles. I guess having national defense. Okay. And he wanted famously total abject surrender.

He wanted Iran to get us back all four paws in the air and say do with me what you will. Well, none of those and that analyst is correct in noting none of those goals have been achieved. The question is, how would you achieve them? So yeah, the United States is admitting defeat. We did not get what we thought we would get or wanted to get.

Some of us never thought we could get that, but it's not what they promised us.

“So what's the bold decisive action that we're not using to get us those things?”

Oh, wait. And of course there's no answer. There's no answer. Half our bad batteries and Patriots have been expended in seven weeks. Kind of gave it our best shot.

What would you do if you were the president? Or attack carguerland? And that's going to do what? I mean, there are no options. Is the truth.

But no one advocating for this will admit that because if they admit that, then they have to Concede that the real goal is nothing to do with what the president of the United States or articulated in public in February or March. No. The real goal is these really goal.

And these really goal is not regime change or end of the nuclear program. The real goal is chaos. Is dysfunction. Is an open, superating wound that lasts for generations. The real goal is Syria or Libya or Iraq.

Somalia. The real goal is destruction for its own sake. Any potential rival to your power is so consumed with the tribal ethnic conflict in his own country that he has no ability to resist your territorial expansion. He has no ability even to notice you exist because he's busy trying to stay alive in the middle

of a generational civil war.

“That's what they wanted in Iran, which is a country of almost 100 million people.”

So what would be the natural obvious? Well, documented effects of this well. Migrant crises in Europe. Further destroy Europe.

Well, that's always been.

And it's really goal destroy Europe. So mad about Rome in 70 AD or something, who knows what? But that's the actual goal. But none of the advocates for this war are staying the course. Exerting American power.

No one in this country will admit it.

We can't appease the Iranians. Okay. What's your plan? No one ever asked that.

“And if asked, let's say someone actually snuck onto a Fox News set and said,”

Okay, tough guy, how would you do it? Well, the next 30 days look like at what cost? What do you think's likely to happen? You're the same person who told us that killing the Ayatola, murdering an 80 something year old religious leader,

was going to collapse the regime. It didn't work. So what do you think will work? And they've no idea. Because their real goal is so ugly that they can't say it out loud.

So they were upset, really upset when the news of this first broke,

even before it was confirmed. But Trump, Trump made it much worse. Again, this is the last group of Americans who reliably support Trump, Neocons. He did what they wanted.

They've been talking about this war as Netanyahu himself said for 30 odd years. And Trump is the first American president who actually did it. He fell for it. They lured him into the trap, and he just jumped. Hope for the best.

It's going to be okay. I promise. Okay, now. So he did. And Trump understands how Chef did he got.

He understands just how full he was. And he's clearly bitter about it. And he understands further than in order to get out of this.

He needs to make this deal.

That is it, maybe. Because there's no option. And he knows that the only force that can prevent this deal from actually happening is not the U.S. Congress. It's the government of Israel.

They will try to queer the deal as they have so many tough. They'll try to blow it up. And so Trump knows that he has to diminish Benjamin Netanyahu. And not just Netanyahu, but the state of Israel's moral legitimacy in the United States in order to keep going.

And so amazingly, he's done that. So when he knows Trump very well once said to me 15 years ago, long before he became president and said in the end, Trump disappoints everyone. Everyone who loves Trump is in the end disappointed.

From his ex-wives to his phone political allies, you name it. They're all disappointed. It looks like it's Benjamin Netanyahu's turn to be disappointed. Here's Donald Trump today at the G7 in Europe,

describing Israel's behavior. And you'll see that when you see the agreement, but it's appropriate that we release the agreement, and we did send a copy to Israel, by the way. They've been a good partner.

“Again, I think they could do better with respect to Hasglilla.”

I'm not saying they shouldn't protect themselves. I'm saying when two drones are shot into the desert and drop harmlessly, you don't have to knock down buildings in Bairou. They could behave better.

And frankly, they could do a better job. I love them as a partner that went terrific. But they could do a much better job with Hasglilla. Wow, consider that for a moment. And he said a lot of things like that in the last 24 hours.

But just in that statement, he said, "We send Israel a copy of the agreement." Well, you sent them a copy, did you? You BCCed them? Didn't consult Israel.

They're a participant. There are a partner in this war. There's a joint war. We're waging with the government of Israel somehow.

First time in American history that's ever happened.

Not a good idea, by the way. Note to self. Don't do that again. But as of right now, we're waging a war with Israel. And we just reach the outline of a peace agreement with the country.

We are fighting with Israel without consulting Israel. We sent them a copy. Bitch. That's exactly what that means. The adults are talking.

It's exactly what Trump is saying to Israel. Then he goes on to say, "Yeah.

“I mean, I think what they're doing in, I'm understand.”

You've got to defend yourself and everything. But like, it's brutal what they're doing. It's brutal. What they're doing. In Beirut, in Lebanon, blowing up a partner pill.

It's at one point, not in that clip, but in another from yesterday. He said, you know, I just think it's just too much. It's just too much. I think going forward, we may leave the fight against Hezbollah to, I don't know, Johny, who runs Syria.

He's a good guy. Let him handle it. He'll do it in a more measured way. Now, Johny, of course, is a former al Qaeda leader. He's running Syria.

Really, and thanks to Israeli pressure. Because Assad, who is literally a practicing medical physician educated in Britain, he's just too radical, meaning to anti-Israel. So we have to have the former al Qaeda leader al Qaeda,

which they told us did 9/11. I don't know if you remember that. Remember those 19 Arabs with box cutters who killed 3,000 Americans?

One of those guys is now our ally in Syria.

“And by the way, that guy, the former al Qaeda leader,”

he's just a more reasonable person. He's just more humane than Benjamin Netanyahu. I mean, I like them all. They're all good guys. But really, if you're looking for humane treatment of civilians,

you gotta go to the al Qaeda guy, not these really prime minister. That's the president said. It's unbelievable. If I said that, which I don't know if I would say that,

is that true? I don't even know. I have maybe less faith in former al Qaeda leaders and the president does. But if I said that, it'd be anti-Isemitism.

What are you saying? Well, Trump is saying that these Israelis are such inhumane savages, who do not consider non-Is really lifefully human. That's true, by the way.

Obviously, that we're going to trust the al Qaeda guy over them.

“So again, watching all the suffered last couple of days”

and your instinct, of course, is always to enjoy

the hysteria and the suffering of neocons, considering how much suffering they've imposed on the rest of us for the past 25 years. Almost in Calculable. No group has done more damage to the United States.

No group has come close to doing them out of damage to the United States. The neocons have done over 25 years. So when you see them go totally bonkers and start renting their garments on Twitter, you're like, ah, I kind of enjoying this.

On the other hand, you just got to be honest and say, I get it. You went into this thinking this would be the war that allowed Israel to fully take over and control the Middle East.

They would have no more real imminent threats. And yet in one of those ironies that define life, the war ended up radically diminishing Israel, radically strengthening Iran, which you consider the existential threat to Israel, which is absurd.

But they think that. They've talked themselves into believing that. Some of them. And you lost the only president you had full control over. Trump went from being a slave to Israel

to comparing Benjamin Netanyahu disfavorably to Al Qaeda. Man, what a ride. So we could pick a thousand different responses and enjoy every one of them. But in the interest of restraint and decency,

we're only going to play one. And it's from Ben Shapiro. Here's Ben Shapiro. So Trump, well-characterizing the Iranians as very reasonable, says that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is a very difficult guy.

Okay, I'm just going to be clear. One of these countries has been flying Saudis next to the United States. And putting the lives of its own soldiers at risk, next to the United States. One of these countries has been trying to kill American soldiers.

So probably we should, you know, be a little bit more measured in our critiques of our allies. The one thing I will say with regard to the president and the vice president and the signals they are sending. If you keep sending the signal to a terribacking regime that chance

death to America, that you want to deal with them so badly, that you're going to tell our allies in the region to stand down. You are giving them an enormous amount of forward momentum. And that is a huge mistake that should not be done. And I hope that the president does not do that.

Again, that signing ceremony and Switzerland should be canceled. It should not happen. All right, now, well, I mean, there's so many things to say, but we'll just keep this limited, because it's just too easy. But you'll notice big picture that there is no distress

at the truly harmful effect to the United States of this war, to the American economy, to our ability to project legitimate power, assuming there are times when you do need to project legitimate power around the world in the Middle East specifically, the deaths of what we don't know the real number.

The number is 13, according to Grog of Americans in this war, is that the real number? No, it's not the real number, actually. What is the real number? We don't know.

We will at some point, no. But Americans have died for Israel in this war. No concern about that at all. The concern is that Trump isn't being appropriately respectable to a foreign head of state.

He's not showing enough respect or deference to a guy

who runs a tiny country of nine million people in a partate state

with no natural resources at all from which we draw. Drive nothing. It's only an expense. Israel said the ledger is just bright red. We're not getting anything out of this at all.

And Trump is treating him like the junior partner he is and negotiating with a real country around.

“And that's just, that's what just sends this guy into orbit.”

But you'll notice that's not enough to say like, how dare you criticize Netanyahu? How dare you? Because his real interest, of course, is not the United States. It's in Israel.

Obviously, it's not a slur or slander or blood libel. It's just like demonstrable from watching the guy come on now.

That's all you care about. Fine. But let's not lie about it.

“But it's not enough just to make that case.”

You also have to get self-righteous. And oh, they're risking their lives for what?

The second this war started,

they used it as a pretext to steal land in a neighboring country Lebanon, they used our money and our military and the lives of our service members to steal more land. Okay. That literally happened.

It's happening now. And guess who paid for it? We did. His Israel in the United States spent more money defending Israel in the last hundred days.

Oh, that's an easy one. We have. We're paying for their self-defense. We pay almost half of their entire military budget. One way or the other.

So don't lecture me about how we owe you something. Are you kidding? And then to the question of whether or not Israel is our ally. In what sense? If Americans die, if the nation gets poorer,

if pressing problems in the United States are ignored in favor of theoretical problems, ideological problems or Israel's problems, thousands of miles away. If your average senator is more concerned about Islamic jihad

than homelessness or housing prices in America, and that is true, how are they in ally? If these really intelligent service had four knowledge of 9/11, which they did,

“according to the American FBI, how is that in ally?”

You know it's coming and you don't tell us. This is the FBI said, that's on an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory. That's a provable fact because they're photographs from September 10th of Mossad operatives mocking the burning of the world trade centers.

And you can look them up if you want. And Fox News at one point right after an 11 ran that package. Wouldn't do that now? The point is not to attack Israel. The point is to attack the idea that this is an ally.

There's nothing ally about that. That's an opponent, a rival, a resentful dependent nation. And of course, that doesn't surprise anybody. Dependency breeds resentment. People who take welfare, hate the government,

adulterate money from their parents' resent their parents.

Like dependency always causes resentment.

And they resent us. Again, that's our fault not theirs, by the way. But the point is it's all ending. Many times today, I got text from people, including in the government saying, I hope this works,

“but there's no way, honestly, that we can stay at peace”

as long as we maintain this relationship with Israel. There are no signs, despite Trump's the atrics, about not liking BB. Nobody likes BB, including Mrs. BB. So that's not like a unique position, right?

He's insufferable and everyone knows that. So a bunch of people texted to say, you know, it's nothing's going to change. Just like after the 12 day war last June, we took out their nuclear sites, and we're done.

But of course, everybody who follows this nose, knew then this is just preparatory to regime change, effort, which it was, right? Took to February, but it happened. And so cynical people in Washington are convinced

that this cycle will continue. But it won't. They may not end soon, but it will end.

But for two reasons, first, in one word, Gaza,

what's happening in Gaza, what Israel has done in Gaza, which is ethnic cleansing, which is murdering people and moving them out because you don't want them there. And by people, people in the basis of bloodline, not even on the basis of religion.

This is happening to Christians and Muslims, but their Arabs, their Palestinians, and they're being moved out of Gaza and the West Bank and Southern Lebanon because Israel wants the land that is ethnic cleansing. It's genocide, it's the definition of genocide.

It has happened before. That is happening now. It's happening with US tax dollars in the Middle East, and Israel is doing it. Now, that fact wasn't till recently very controversial in the United States.

You couldn't say that you were somehow the criminal. The people committing murder were fine. The people complaining about it were the criminals. That's been kind of the status quo for a long, long time. It's fine for you to commit genocide.

It is totally evil for me to say something about it. But that's non-sensical. It's actually totally unnatural. It's crazy, really. And so that can't continue, and now all of a sudden,

it's not going to continue because too many people know what's happening. Now, they don't know the tales because they can't, because there's almost no access at all to Gaza.

and an effort to keep secret what they have done

to this civilian population.

“We have no even good guests as to the death toll,”

which is clearly over a hundred thousand Palestinians. Women and children, being the majority of those deaths apparently, but we don't know because Israel won't allow any independent assessment of what has happened there. But images, including satellite images, make it really, really clear

that Israel used the pretext of October 7 to just destroy Gaza. Over two million people live there. How many people live there now? Like at some point, we're going to know exactly what Israel did. And it will be very obvious, in fact, impossible to deny

that what they did was genocide. And genocide is wrong. No matter who commits it, whether it's the Nazis, whether it's the war, whether it's the Turks against the Armenians, it doesn't matter. Killing entire populations because you don't want them there,

killing their children because you don't want them to grow up into your opponents. That's always wrong. It doesn't matter. There is no special carve out for that kind of behavior.

Ethnic cleansing is never allowed.

Period because it violates a universal standard. That applies even to Israel. Now, that's not something that Americans have heard. They accept maybe on like the cookie left. They've been mad about it for a long time.

“But now, no people are like, yeah, well, why is that wrong?”

And the response has been unverrying. Shut up. Big it. Not see. No, it's like, I'm not the one who killed all those kids you did.

And you're making excuses for it. That is a dawning realization on the world, including the United States. And no amount of buying social media platforms or CBS news or CNN.

It's too late. People now. And at some point, they're going to know a lot more. And when they do know a lot more, the people who did it and made excuses for it will be punished.

Because justice does exist because it's organic. It's part of nature. We don't create these standards of behavior. We're born knowing them because they're part of the natural order. God created those standards.

And no amount of pretending that he didn't or pretending that certain people don't have to observe those standards because they've got a special deal. No amount of that kind of silly lying changes the fact that when you kill in a sense, you are punished for it. Certainly in the next life, but usually in this life, too.

And they will be punished for it. Everybody who participated in this and everybody who made excuses for it or pretended it wasn't happening or attacked people who noted the truth about what was happening. All of those people will be reviled. And in some cases, they'll be formally punished.

Not celebrating that, just noting that that's a fact. And you can tell when you listen to them talk, screech when they get hysterical. You know they know it, too. They know it, too.

They will be no Holocaust museum in the world that doesn't know what happened in Gaza. Because it's too absurd. Genocide's okay in one place, but bad in another, no one believes that. And so that will make it absolutely impossible for the US Congress, no matter how much money they take from various lobbies to continue to uncritically.

And without any strings attached at all, which is the status quo, send money billions, billions, and billions of American tax dollars to Israel. That just can't continue.

And the second thing that has dawned on people, including people who sort of paid attention

like me, we didn't really know until recently was the people advocating for the state of Israel or both dishonest and in some cases like completely crazy. And not saying that in a pejorative way, I mean it sounds like that, but literally disconnected from reality. And not everyone who disagrees with me or you or is crazy.

I mean they're legitimate disagreements. We just see things differently, we have different interests. That's okay. But there is a kind of style of argument that's instantly recognizable as nuts. Because it has no reference point at all in reality, it's all made up.

“And what it lacks in veracity, in verifiable truth, like here's why I think this is true.”

Let me show you, it makes up for in vehements. And so crazy people in case you haven't dealt with them before, religious nuts. Keep repeating assertions that don't make any sense with increasing vehements as if saying it again and again and again will somehow make it true. It is like a spell in that way.

And you don't want to pick on 'em because he's got enough problems. But ambassador, Mike Huckabee, the US ambassador to Israel, has been a non-stop generator of examples of this. Nice man. But somebody's gone really wrong and now everybody knows it.

So here's Mike Huckabee's latest defense of Israel, which is in fact an indictment of Israel and of himself. This is just another reminder that it is your heritage without a doubt.

Without Israel, without the Jewish foundation. There will not be an America.

“The or our daily existence for what happened in this land.”

Without Israel, there would be no America.

So you almost want to just say hold on for a second ambassador.

What are you talking about? I mean, just not to be artistic or literal about it. But Israel was founded in 1948. America, well, now famously 250 years ago, next month. So like that doesn't the timeline doesn't seem to add up.

There obviously you don't mean it literally. You mean it like conceptually or ideologically or theologically. But like tell me how that works. Why tried a version of that with them? Like just to explain what you're talking about.

And the answer when you pressed was shut up, not see. That's not an answer of course. And it doesn't in the end.

“It's staying the person who at whom it's aimed.”

It stains the person who throws it. Who says something like that. It diminishes the accuser, not the accused. And it's not just my cuckabee, of course. It's almost every defender of the indefensible, which would be the behavior of the state of Israel.

Over the past two years, almost every single one of them has gotten to that place. Where rather than answer the question in a rational way, even if you disagree, but like here's my case. If you press them on the details, whether it's pick one, Tom Cotton or Ted Cruz or any of them. Markle of N. The answer pretty quickly is shut up Nazi.

And we know from the short but awful rain of terror by 50 year old liberal white ladies a couple of years ago during BLM. You know, these things burn bright, but then burn out because there's nothing underneath them.

You can scream racist at someone and it works for the first six months or a year, but it doesn't work for 10 years.

Because that's not an answer. In this latest round of identity politics and liberal divorce lady politics has gotten us into the single least helpful war and maybe most momentously bad war the United States has ever been involved in ever. That's where it got us. And everybody knows it. So while I understand the concern that this horrible cycle which has been going on for decades now where the United States gets abused by its proxy state Israel.

And then continues to pretend it didn't happen. No, no, they didn't attack the US Liberty on purpose or whatever. They'd nothing to do with the Kennedy assassination. We just redacted all mentions of Israel from the Kennedy files, just because. Where we pretended didn't happen, then attack anybody who asks about it.

That's over because too much has become public. And you know that you know that they know that the defenders of the Netanyahu government know that. Because they've doubled down on their truly counterproductive and can morally disgusting effort to conflate the government of Israel with global jewelry. Attack is real attack nannyahu you hate all Jews. Totally irrational and wrong.

And it does nothing. But inspire the anti-Semitism they claim to hate. Maybe they're trying to inspire it. Who knows what their motive is. It's having the opposite of the supposedly intended effect. But you know they're losing control.

Because rather than train their fire on. Long-term sincere critics of Israel. They have started as all religious fanatics do in the end. They have started reserving their harshest criticism for apostates.

For people who are on their side or sort of on their side of always kind of been on their side.

But who may differ on one minor detail.

“I believe in the resurrection, but this trans substantiation thing that's tough for me.”

That's the guy we burn. And they're doing it because they are religious nuts. Because they believe in Torajudiism that clearly don't. But because the crazed irrational religious impulse has run away with them. By the way, the irony of them calling.

The Iranians theocratic fascists is not lost on the world. When Mark Levin calls you an extremist, it doesn't hurt. They don't want to wind up stuck on capsules for their lives. They'd rather feel like they have some say and how they take care of their bodies. And that's why more Americans are turning to more gentle alternatives to the ingredients they recognize.

One of those alternatives is a dose for cholesterol. Dose for cholesterol is a clinically backs cholesterol support supplement. The targets triglycerides, LDL, HDL and total cholesterol levels. We know a bunch of people use it and the results have been overwhelming. They no longer fear having blood work done because at last the results are good.

And they're not on some kind of weird chemical cocktail. It actually works. It wouldn't partner with them if it didn't work. Dose is easy to use. It's a daily 2 ounce liquid shot that tastes like mango.

Oh, no capsules, no powders. It's seamless to use. Visit dos daily.co/tucker. Use code Tucker for 35% off. That's dos daily.co/tucker code Tucker for 35% off. That's worth it.

But we thought to be interesting to talk to one of these apostates. It's Pierce Morgan who's been in the television business. Newspaper business media for 40 years. And for almost all of that time, in fact, probably even now. It's like a pretty reliable supporter of Israel. He's not against Israel.

I've always had the same view.

I don't think we should be paying for this. But of course, they have a right to defend themselves. The right to self-defense is an inherent human right. It cannot be taken away. And it applies to states as much as it does individuals.

So of course, they have a right to defend themselves. No one wants to destroy Israel. He doesn't. I don't. But like this is too much. Like genocide.

Kind of thinks of. I'm out. That's all he said. And now they are painting Pierce Morgan specifically. Mark Lavin of Fox News is calling the guy a Nazi, a Nazi.

“So we thought to be amusing to talk to Pierce Morgan about what's that like?”

What's it like to spend your entire life supporting Israel in the way that kind of all Center left Center right, you know, sort of professional class.

People have always supported Israel.

Maybe not passionately, but just sort of by wrote. Of course, I support Israel. Tiny, heroic little countries surrounded by enemies, you know, love the cobutses or whatever. What's it like for that guy to be called a Nazi by a Fox News anchor?

So we asked him. Here's Pierce Morgan. Pierce Morgan, thank you for doing this. I've known you for so long. And I always have thought of you correctly.

I think is a very reasonable man as pro Israel. And the fact is that basically a Zionist, a defender of Israel. And then I wake up and I read from Mark Lavin that you're literally a Nazi. You're a member of something called the woke rike. And I wonder where you went wrong.

What happened? Are you taking it? Well, there was also news to meet. I could have to say no. It's not often you wake up and discover you are actually a member of Adolf Hitler's Nazi party.

But that appears what Martin of In thinks I am. Yeah, I mean, the guy. I don't really know much of it. And you know better than I do. I've watched his work.

He seems to resort to add home and I'm attacks on anyone that dares stand up to this particular Israeli government.

“Which I think is an interesting strategy because most people I talk to of any political persuasion right now are pretty critical of Israeli government.”

And in the same way that Ben Shapiro and others have, I think, really calls themselves enormous reputation or damage over this Iran war in particular. It comes down to their refusal to countenance any criticism of Benjamin Netanyahu, even when he's doing things which most people think are completely wrong. And I don't understand why they think that's a winning strategy.

It seems from the dwindling viewers that both of them have that viewers don't like it. I'm not quite sure who they're doing this for other than their own ego's, but it's embarrassing. It's ridiculous.

And obviously I'm not a member of the Nazi party and never happy.

And I don't equate criticizing this very hard line Israeli government with, in my view, complete psychopaths like Ben Gibir and Smodridge, saying and doing things which are utterly repellent. You know, I just think the idea that criticism of that kind of thing, meaning that you become a member of the Woke Reich, is patently ridiculous.

Well, it's also weird considering that the people being targeted and honestly, I would include myself in this, are the more moderate people, certainly you have been, I just want to say it again, a consistent and pretty loyal defender of Israel ever since I, you know, I noticed your, yeah, your public career, Meghan Kelly, same thing.

Why attack those people? Why not make some effort to say to people like you, or Meghan Kelly, look, I know you like Israel, you always have, there are some lunatics in the current government.

“We can reform this. Why does zero tolerance policy for any criticism?”

It seems counterproductive. Well, it's a counterproductive. It's, it's actually deeply offensive,

to exist as a basic right, I've always supported their right,

I'll try to go with a seventh to defend themselves. I thought they had a moral public duty to their people to defend themselves after that appalling terror attack, but I also question quite early on, whether their response was proportionate, and I continue to question the proportionality of Israel's response

to all the threats that they face. And I don't, you know, I don't, I don't say for a moment that Israel has not been threatened and doesn't remain threatened. Right. I, a variety of terrorist groups, some has ballads of the hooties to Hamas and the tentacles of Iran,

spread along to all those groups. I don't, for any moment, want to suggest that isn't happening, or it's not a real thing, but how a country like Israel, which is, you know, pretty much the superpower of the region,

which has an extraordinarily powerful military.

It's got itself into a really difficult place on this, where it is becoming increasingly a global prior. And that's not your fault, or my fault, or making Kelly's fault. But increasingly, I think it is a situation exacerbated by the likes of Ben Shapiro and Martin Levin,

because they conflate legitimate criticism of the actions of a government with, in many cases, they spray gun people with the charge of anti-Semitism,

“or as we see now, where you must be part of the work right,”

which, of course, would be ridiculously ironic if that was the case, given what they think I'm about. And so the whole thing to me seems completely absurd, dangerous, I think, for Israel and his reputation. Dangerous for Jewish people around the world,

many of whom have said to me they completely agree with my criticisms of this Israeli government, the conflation of criticism of any government with the people

or the country, I think, is always absurd.

I mean, in 2003, I led the Daily Mirror newspaper in the UK, one of the biggest selling Delhi newspapers in a relentless and very, very full-on campaign to prevent or try to prevent, Tony Blair going to warly rock over what turned out to be misinformation about Saddam Hussein, having weapons of mass destruction.

And the point about that was that the Daily Mirror was the Labour supporting newspaper, and we had been full-squared behind Tony Blair. We've been very supportive of Tony Blair, but on that decision to go to war in 2003, and my own brother was fighting into British Army at the time,

and was sent to Bazaar to fight on behalf of my country.

“So I think I had a right to have a view about this,”

and my view was that we had not proven the case against Saddam Hussein, and I stood up with the paper and a day after day opposed it. Now, does any of that visceral criticism of Tony Blair's decision, and that of his government, mean that I hated the people of my country? No, did it mean I hate my country?

No, the opposite, in fact. I was doing this because I wanted to be supportive of my country, supportive of my country's people, my fellow countrymen, by stopping something happening that I felt was detrimental to the interests of both my country and its people.

And I feel the same way about this decision to go to war in Iran. I think that Benjamin Netio is pretty clear now. It's been a lot of time trying to persuade Donald Trump that America should join Israel in attacking Iran.

And he presented to him, we noticed from a big New York Times deep dive on this, he presented to him a sequence of events that would happen if they decapitated the leadership. If they killed the Iotala and they had information

that would allow them to be able to do that. And many of his top people, then the argument that Netio and the head of Moss are presented in the White House situation room, two Donald Trump face-to-face, the Mossay guy came in remotely, but Netio, I was sitting there, was that if they did this,

then what would happen is the regime and the IRGC would collapse from within. The Iranian people would rise up in rebellion and finally overthrow this regime after nearly five decades. And that they would all be too distracted to concern themselves

with the straight-of-home moose.

“Well, the only thing that happened after all that,”

because Donald Trump, I think, bought into this and thought this was achievable. And maybe that was a bit of hubris after what happened in Venezuela and other successful missions, maybe the 12-day war last January,

and he didn't really respond or retaliate, gave Trump a full sense of security about what may happen if he did this. But he went along with it. I think that he believed what Netio told him.

Ultimately, though, Trump is the President of the United States. Decisions he takes on behalf of America are on him. Another thing he should be, you know, no one should be on any illusion about that part of this.

And none of that has happened. I have a deal, which most people, including many people on the conservative right in America, think he's a terrible deal. There is no better potentially worse than the deal

that Obama got, which of course Donald Trump and many others, trash mercilessly at the time and have done ever since. And what was it all for? The regime remains intact. The Iatala was killed,

but his younger son, obviously, younger son, but his son has replaced him and is much more hard-liner radical from reports I've seen. The IRGC remains in a complete, vice-light grip of the country,

so much so that there've been no rebellions by Iranian people whatsoever.

“And I think they've been badly let down in this whole process.”

And of course, there's been this asymmetric war, just been waged by the Iranian regime. Well, they worked out that if they controlled the flow of 20% of the world's energy, gas and oil and fertiliser and other things

through the straight-up on those, if they turn that tap off, they could cause enormous economic damage to the whole world. And if they did it simultaneously

with firing off missiles and rockets of their neighbouring Gulf states, thereby causing those states enormous damage in terms of economic damage, and stopping tourists going there and so on,

which is very much their next business model. You know, we even had interviews together in reality. And we know this is the way they want to take things away from relies on oil to tourism and sport and entertainment and so on.

I don't open things up that way, but it relies of course on safety. And the Iranians knew that. So there's been two wars going on. You know, I don't dispute for a moment

that the Americans and Israelis have damaged Iran's military capability in the short term. But if this report is true, talk to you about this 14-point deal as being proposed,

which apparently the Americans are signed up to,

if the Iranians get $300 billion

out of all this, not understanding where ever it comes from, if they get that amount of money, what are they going to do with it? They're obviously just going to replace all the military

hardware that's being destroyed. And I suspect they will continue to try and develop the nuclear weapons, which was all supposed to stop. So I'm not,

I'm not sure whether there's any kind of victory here. In fact, I think quite the opposite.

“And I think if Donald Trump was honest with himself,”

if you take him back to the day before he launched this attack with the Israelis, I think now knowing everything has happened. He wouldn't do it. Cost of living is already making it hard to live here,

and it's not getting any better. Unfortunately, it's likely to get worse, and a lot of Americans fill the gap with credit cards, not just for fancy dinners, but to cover things like groceries and bills.

That is a disaster. It's understandable, but don't cut down that road, because there is a tax in effect to survival tax of 20% interest or more.

Why would you do that? Why would you hand money to the big banks when you can keep it for your family? Our friends in American financing have a better way.

If you're looking to buy your first home

or refinance recurrent, when they're helping Americans achieve the dream of a ownership with monthly mortgage rates, currently in the Fives. American financing saves its customers

in average of 800 bucks per month.

“That's nearly 10 grand every year back to you.”

This isn't just alone. It's a total financial reset. So debt is tough, but there's a smart way to do it in a reckless, self-destructive way to do it, credit cards.

And so we recommend American financing. They're salary-based, not commission-based, which means they actually work for you, not the banks.

They're called America's home for home loans for a reason. Call 800-685-5696-865-5696-6696. American financing.net slide. Imagine if every time inverse creamer

or another top investor bought a stock, you bought it too. In your own brokerage account, automatically. Well, that now exists, and it's called autopilot.

Build by the team behind the viral Pelosi stock tracker. autopilot lets you browse their marketplace of strategies run by proven investors or AI German models. Just find one with a high return, connect your personal brokerage account,

like a Schwab or Robin Hood, and every trade they make, you make automatically.

Your money never leaves your own account,

autopilot just mirrors the moves. So now no more guessing, no more staring at charts, and no more checking the market between meetings. Also over 1.3 billion is already invested. So if you wanted to check it out,

search autopilot in the app store, or go to join autopilot.com. That's join autopilot.com. Investing has risks like the loss of principle. I'd perfect a flueling stack.

Zone. Pack. Pack. Pick make. And so, Philip.

Shoppapoteek says, "Juselage" and "Hallo-Fulling". Here, if you're all at the bottom, you can come through the allergy time. As a new customer, spend 10% up to 35 € per day.

With the code, "Neu-10".

Just go to shoppapoteek.com/goodshiner.

Goodshiner. Goodshiner. A lot of organizations talk about supporting veterans, but not all of them actually do it, not even close.

“And that's why we only part with companies we know”

are telling the truth and really working honestly to make a difference. Black rifle coffee is one of them we've been partners with them for years. We know them.

Black rifle supports good-hearted American flanthropies like boot campaign. For years, boot campaign is provided

individualized care for veterans

and military families dealing with the wounds of foreign wars. PTSD, chronic pain, traumatic brain injuries. When you get your coffee from Black rifle, which we do because it's delicious,

you help keep missions like boot campaigns alive. Carrying for American heroes does not stop when they leave the military. That's why companies like Black rifle and groups like boot campaign are vital.

To help today visit bootcampaign.org bootcampaign.org. Very good, very good. Very good. This story is very good. It's a lot.

Cool, it's a lot. Cool, it's a lot. What are you talking about? Computer, focus management, finance, and software.

Nega. But it's a bit complicated. A lot of photos of the low-stoe are made of meat and meat. It's very good.

It's very good. Hold your money with this story. but yet it has a special aromatic with some degree of cream. And that creates the cube capsule machine in Diner Chibofiale and of Chibode E. "Burg."

It seems like the biggest loser and I hate to agree with Mark Levin on this, but is Israel. I mean, Israel did not defend itself during this war. The United States spent many billions defending Israel, much more than Israel spent defending itself. And Israel used this war which it inspired to start. Another war in Lebanon, which would behave disgracefully.

Everyone in the United States saw that. The U.S. is its last remaining supporter, meaning full supporter on the globe. And that's clearly going away. Trump, who was, you know, Netanyahu's closest partner in the world, who called for his pardon repeatedly, defended him against corruption charges ridiculously.

But vigorously, he is attacking Netanyahu. So Israel, and I just want to ask you since you live in a world where, you know, of a lot of sort of center-right center-left, but Israel supporting people in the media,

“do you feel a change in what people are saying out loud about Israel?”

It feels like there are lots of massive support. 100%. Another thing Netanyahu has become massively damaging to Israel and to the country's reputation around the world. I mean, the statistics in all the polls speak for themselves.

You know, I've never seen polls quite like I'm seeing now about the view of Israel amongst Americans,

you know, near two thirds of the Americans out of the negative opinion of Israel. It's never been like that in our lifetime. However, this has always been the opposite. It's always been a majority support for Israel. This is the real-time damage that I believe Netanyahu,

fueled by ministers like Benghiver and Smodridge, have been causing. And, you know, Netanyahu, I'm afraid I'm very cynical about his motivations for all this war mungering. He knows that the war mungering is popular internally in Israel. Far, makes him far more popular than anything else does.

In fact, the rest of it makes him unpopular. So this is a politician, a canny politician, you know, he's very skilled at it. But he's facing his own political future, and his own liberty is a stake. Because he's obviously at the moment able to use all the war mungering, as an excuse as he has been, to keep delaying this criminal prosecution against him.

Which, if he's found guilty of the charges, he'll go to prison. So this is a guy fighting for his political future. And this is a career politician who loves and craves power. And he's fighting for his actual liberty. And both of these things seem to me to be predicated on him continuing to attack other countries,

whether it's Iran, whether it's a Lebanon or whatever it may be.

“He is using this, I think, from a personally, in my, I'm cynical about it.”

I think that there's a personal upside for Netanyahu in continuing to do these things. And I think in the case of Bank of Iran's smudge rich, their agenda is even more insidious. I think it's pretty crystal clear now that what they want to do is kick all the Palestinians out of Gaza, out of the West Bank, and take over both of those territories completely, bring them into Israel, and do the same as other Lebanon.

You know, these are people talking, Bank of Iran is 50th birthday several weeks ago. His wife gave him a cake with a new son. And that video was put out. He's somebody that when detainees from a flatilla, which was behaving perfectly peacefully, wherever people think of it.

What a female detainee was pretty well brutalized on camera. Bank of it posted it to his own ex account proudly with him smurking and encouraging it in the background. And that was too far, even for Netanyahu, who had to condemn it for doing that. So there's a lot going on here. A lot of personal agendas, a lot of very big picture agendas.

But the combined impact of all of this is that Israel is getting ever more unpopular. And I know from speaking to many of my Jewish friends around the world, whether it be London, New York, LA, or further afield, they're all very concerned about this. So this idea that Netanyahu represents what most Jewish people think, for example,

I think it's for the birds. I'm not aware of a single Nazi official who was as openly blood Thursday as Ben Gevering, including girls who was a nutcase in my opinion. And you know, they of course were all executed. The ones who survived the war executed at Narnberg.

We don't actually have visibility into what's happened in Gaza, because they've murdered so many journalists. And no one's allowed in to see it. But we know over 100,000 people have been killed. Most of them non-combatants, tens of thousands of women and children.

Like when all of that comes to light, which it will, I don't see how we go back to the kind of the status quo of even a year ago, where normal people like me, including me, would say, "No, I support Israel." Like how could anyone support, once that comes out.

People are going to be punished for that now.

“I think that some of these people in that government are evil.”

I think Ben Gevering and Smodridge are evil people. And you just judge them on what comes out of their mouths and their actions. And, you know, it's an interesting irony in what you just said, because they literally just brought in a new law in the Kinesi. That was celebrated by Ben Gevering, because he drove it.

And it's basically a two-tier apartheid style,

a new amendment to the law, where if they determine the Israeli authorities that a Palestinian is a terrorist, they can execute them. But the same rule will not apply if it's an Israeli. Even though you've seen previously, you've seen Israeli Prime Minister's murdered by right wing Israeli terrorists.

So, in that killer, who killed Rebeam, would not be held for the same account as a Palestinian, they determined, has committed an act of terrorism. That is exactly the kind of two-tier legal system and apartheid system, which we saw ravaging South Africa before Mandela was released in prison.

“And, which I think is part of the ongoing problem,”

which is what happens in the Middle East, while it all comes back to Palestine. It all comes back to the view that many people around the world have, that the Palestinians have been oppressed by the Israelis,

and that they have been treated a second-class second-tier citizens.

When you bring in a law that only applies to Palestinians but not Israelis as a government, you are telling the world that not that you deny a two-tier system, but you're actively encouraging it. So, those have been criticizing Israel for what people, and many people view as an occupation of Gaza, for example,

they're now seeing in real time new laws being brought in, which proved the point that the Israeli government treats Palestinians in a different way, in a lower way, in a worse way than they would treat their own Israelis. - Remarkable, I don't think there's any coming back from this. I would just end by asking, do you have a message for Ben Shapiro and Mark Levin,

“who've been engaging with you quite extensively online?”

What would you say to them right now? - I'd say you can have all the ad-homonym attacks you like. I've been trading ad-homonym blows with people for about 40 years. I used to do it, so I grew in my local pub in Southern England, and be regularly banned by the land lady Mary,

for getting two garalists on the Friday night, and arguing to vehemently, and getting two ad-homonym. I'm more than broad shoulders enough to deal with what comes out of Shapiro's mouth, or living's mouth, I don't care. I'm quite happy to trade those kind of blows,

and I find it quite enjoyable, actually. I wish probably says a little about me,

but the bottom line of a say to them is, you're not winning this, you're losing,

and you've put all your cards on the belief that everybody else is going to agree with you, that if anyone criticises Israeli government, then their Nazis,

And that has been one of the most insidious false claims widely repeated by people that follow the likes of Shapiro and Levine,

as certainly since October the 7th.

“And the idea that you cannot stand up to a government,”

even if it's a government you support is your own government, in many cases.

The idea that you can't criticise that government means you're not actually journalists, people can't be journalists who look at these things with an open mind,

“and have intellectual honesty about it, you are just partisan activists,”

and you're propagandists for a government that is making Israel increasingly globally unpopular. And so my message to them, not that they want to hear it, all that they will listen to me, but my message to them is, I'd stop the ad homer and attacks, stop attacking people simply for doing their job as journalists, rightly holding Netanyahu and his government to proper account.

“And maybe you should start doing that too.”

You would be doing Israel a favor, you'd be doing Israelis a favor,

you'd be doing the world's 15 million Jewish people a favor.

If you just got off this ridiculous propaganda wall that you've been perched on for all this time, and actually started calling out what the rest of us can see is increasingly unconscionable action. Amen. Pierce Morgan, I hope they listen to you. I don't think they will. But I hope they won't, but I feel better for getting it out of that topic. Amen, great to see you, thank you for doing this.

Pleasure, nice to talk to you. And thanks for joining us, we will see you next Wednesday.