Are you tired of the mainstream media, condescensions snap judgments and outrageous bias national reviews podcast the This is your oasis of sanity and clarity in a world gone mad join nor view right is like rich lowry, Charles see, w cook, Jim Geraghty, jack butler and others for an in depth, analysis and incisive commentary on the lake. News in american political life find us on apple, podcast, spotify or ever you get your point welcome to the Mccarthy report, the pipe guess where I rich larry, discuss with Annie Mccarthy, the latest legal and nash security issues this week. What else the latest on the Gaza war and the trump trial by the way for some reason, yard

already following asunder streaming service. You can find us everywhere from spotify to itunes and please give pakistan, podcast and mccarthy the glowing need gushing, five, our views they deserve on I turned and now without further ado, I will until this very podcast, through the miracle, riverside none other than any mccarthy rich. How are you I'm not too bad Andy? How you I'm ok, I'm trying to decide whether whether and how to wade into your rum, your battle with your at our colleagues on the killers of the flower, moon, yup YAP, because it's it's like it's the kind of movie. I would hate some inclined to agree with you. Thank you bought it turned at morton scorsese, he is. Is my fellow member of the cardinal haze high school hall of fame he's

laugh class of he's class of nineteen sixty and I'm class a nineteen. Seventy seven, but I didn't know, went all I heard you guys argue in a battle that I I know, Maddy and Charlie, didn't hadn't. Seen it themselves yet that I think Mary Mary seen it and she agrees with the fathers really I saw that take this up tomorrow on the boy editors are so so it turns out that score. He apparently they do the last seen at haze, which I didn't until I read this right up that they had at the year the cardinal haze alumni section of the website yesterday and of course I that actually excited me a little bit about the movie, even though the topic- and I am so tired at the narrow- I don't know if I can take him at this point anymore, but then

I read the great armen whites review, a thoughtful teddy roque, fat and unlike help I sit through this thing, so I dont know what to do. I don't know whether you believe mattie or me, kyle smith and armand white, that's does the question. Is I a lot of personal alone? people read it aloud. People love it so far You should see yourself it at some point, but maybe maybe, where you and a setting where you have a fast forward button up demand three hours it with three hours in twentyman three and a half year. all right, so any quick election take before we dive into the wasteland gaza yeah. except what, when you said three and a half hours just now, I just thought the last time I was that miserable with watch the play the giants. I know we weren't gonna do sports, but so the election, but you know, I think it's a bigger. I think it's a bigger deal

then a lot on a lot of people on our side. Do I agree with a lot of stuff? That's been written on our website that, It's an overstatement to to regard it as if it were a catastrophe. It's certainly a disappointment, but to me and I'm really inclined to agree wholeheartedly with with no arrangement on this. I just think it's another data point for what a catastrophe republicans according by nominating tromp even as day by day, as we go by it. It seems more more certain that that's precisely what they're going to do. I thought the debate last night, for example, was very interesting, but

you know I'm inclined to agree with you that you're off the main event isn't there, which he wasn't it kind of makes the whole thing seemed irrelevant, but I just don't term I I hear what you're saying about you know that the whole if the elections were held today in the wake of that new york times, Sienna Paul there came out last week but the is you know, leaving aside the obvious, which is that the election of courses and being held today, I dont think it makes sense to talk about if the election were held today, without factoring in the most consequential ingredient of the election, which is if the election

held today. The Democrats would have started their onslaught that hasn't started yet a year ago, have done that six months ago, at least yet for them, and it would be. You know, the numbers would look very different and you know rich. I thought that when, if you crawled into that pole and when you factor in the reality of the race, which is that it's not going to be a two way race, it's a three way race. Well then, once it's a three way, race, trump isn't winning in five of those six states anymore, he's losing in he's. What's it three biden to trumpet one tide

and I don't I. I think that the the surge when you give a third choice to people who are being polled, the surge for the for robert F Kennedy jr, who is a five alarm friggin, not that most people, don't even I I mean if twenty five people or twenty four nineteen to twenty four percent of people in this country are thinking of ring for that guy, that means they have investigated what, if you know what he s for overruled their voting for the name. You know there's a candidate for less ness, yet a fright, but what it reflects is that both parties do not want the current front runners too one when I thought, when the most interesting things that came out of the election in ohio, only thirty three percent of republicans, one trump to run

that was the pulling the came out of the election. I mean people don't want trump, and I think that the election, the other night, is just another data point that, where he's frightened centre, and where the candidate who who are on the ballot. are somehow associated with his stop. The steel claims we lose and we don't just look I mean we often get our doors blown off. So I just think that the the The terrible dynamic of this race is that trump is pretty popular in the republican party, not nearly as popular as he would have. You think I mean, I think, he's got very strong support from his course supporters who are like over the moon in support of them and then he's got probably two thirds of the party or more who are willing to vote for him. If he's denominate, but he's got twenty five

son at least one for firm under any circumstances and then because we are immersed now in republican politics because of the primary it becomes a second or third order issue, but it's the most important issue that when you go where open the lens from the republican base or the republican voter the nation wide electorate, that's going to be at issue in november. He never gets better than fifty six percent approval and by the time the Democrats are done with them. I don't even know where that number is going to be. It's been as high as sixty seven in the past, so I I just. I don't see how this guy, I not only don't see how he wins. That's it doesnt! You know it's. not invested in you? I don't think you can win, but you know that's kind of beside the point. The more important thing is the dynamic of the

action will be. If he's the nominee, republicans are probably going to lose the senate and the house, and then the Democrats will get to get rid of the filibuster and do all the other crazy stuff that they've been planning to do so. To me that a catastrophe. Yes, sir, I can prove it iran, but more to the point. There is now there's a chance, you're right, which is, which is why, even though I'm more bush on trumps, your chances you do if the house and add just because to avoid the risk that what are you you're takers is ripe. Plus there is the question of governance, What would be rather important as well that's actually I was planted you gotta first, let's less actually call inaudible and go into that. The trump civil fraud try first and then will come to Gaza, so we had trumps. Testimony on

monday right- and it is kind of you back to trump the money, a lot of our fire, Then he had a vodka recording on thursday morning here yesterday at what what some in any thing move the needle here now you know, because it can't write the judge already get an issue before the trial started. That's I was I had trouble. I there. I was actually doing a fox thing last night, and while they had me on they cutter up alina harbour, who is one of trumps lawyers, the one who gave the fiery press conference it from the warehouse the other day and she they cut or while I was on- and she said she was all whipped up after revoke his testimony- and she said

tomorrow, we're going to come in and move to dismiss this case because they obviously abbot made out the elements of the event and I had trouble A lean is doing the best. She cannot turn a poke fun at her, but I had trouble keeping a straight face because the judge is already ruled again the bright she'll house. The motion to disperse could work out right They are all getting sucked into the idea that this was a trial, in the economy, think of what yeah, but that that's exactly right. It was a it was a complete farce and and it so in that sense it can't move the needle. But that doesn't mean some interesting things didn't happen and so before trump and Finally, a vulgar testified this week, don junior and Eric testified last week, and you know that,

subject. This is basically the trump kids are saying they didn't get involved in the granular detail of statements of financial condition, and they left that too much which was trumps accounting. vodka. They thought it. They acted like they had a a gotcha moment with events, because there were some many males where when they were discussing too if alone, I think it was on the doral property in florida and the bank wanted an assurance that trump's net worth was three billion and she was trying to get it knocked down to two and a half billion and they acted like the state acted that was a big deal. It seemed to me the opposite. It seemed to be number one that they should. It showed that they were, but you know they weren't. This wasn't a complete,

jam. They were actually interested in and concerned with what the terms war, but also if he, vodka and the other executives at the company were doing that. That's exactly what executives supposed to do you shop around to try to get the best terms in a volatile market we ve seen with a lot of these billionaire sit there. You know their network goes up and down in the billions year by year, depending on what financial conditions are right

so how? Why would it be bad to try to get down to two and a half billion rather than three? Because if there is an economic downturn, the ties up a lot of his wealth that he would otherwise be able to use to generate more revenue right. So none of that seemed a bad to me and then trump, of course, is not fighting. This is a legal case. He's fighting it as a political battle, because the judges already indicated em. He can't win the legal case, so he understood so whatever recourse he has he's going to be on appeal. So he's fighting this politically to the extent is addressing the substance of the case. It's typical tromp his if they are saying that he over valued his

assets whose position is that he undervalued them and that they are actually worth much much more than even they put in the statements of financial condition, which I dont know that that argument actually helps him, but I dont think he cares about it. The legal argument I mean it doesn't really help illegally, because your basically saying I didn't think it needed to be accurate, he's ye you know he's saying so: why? Why doesn't his caviar argument when the day it is it? Is it because you're saying something that you're supposed to believe is true and that the I just wrong now you believed it was false. You're exaggerating, so it doesn't matter that you,

this language out elsewhere. That says, hey, hey, hey, don't don't believe any this, yes, soap, trump call this the worthless clause is it's it's a disclaimer, but he called it the worthless clause and the judge has seized on at because I think you are let's remember arthur ron. Garan is an elected democrat in the new york system. That's how the trial court judges get to be judges and he's pretty much followed. Tish James' the attorney general's lead throughout this proceeding and he was particularly snotty in his pre trial motion or his pretrial summary judgment, opinion when he was addressing this argument by trump, and he seized on the fact that trunk called it a worthless clause in the sense that what trump meant by that

said. The representations in the statement of financial can condition are essentially worthless because Evaluating the value of assets is a subject of business to begin with, but because you're dealing with sophisticated economic actors in these transactions. All these guys at this is big finance right. These are big banks and big insurance companies and billionaire counterparty on the other end, everybody does their own due diligence. You know if you go inter j P, morgan chase- and you say you know- I need an eight hundred million dollar alone. An here my collateral when it's worth two billion dollars, J p

morgan chase doesn't say. Oh okay, that's fine, you know they go out and investigate it. They have whole departments that that's all they do is evaluate risk so that to me that should win the day and When we ask. Why doesn't one things you have to bear in mind, which is that this is an unprecedented case. Everybody who has looked into this. come away saying that new york state has never brought a case even under this monstrous statue, section sixty three twelve, which doesn't require them to prove that there's fraud, victims or that there was intended to achieve or any of that stuff

They ve never brought a case that was based solely on an alleged inflation of the value of assets in which there were no victims or no one claim that they had been in any way deceived. So this first it. So you know why you, when you say why doesn't that when the day my My initial reaction to that is, I think your point is exactly why they don't bring these cases now, because they shouldn't be brought in the first place, cause there's no does no harm. The job it has dismissed this claim his rationale is that, even if the other party is going to you now cut the cards is going home. You know check your

valuations, you still don't have a right to say something that you know it's not true. So if I give you, you know a piece of fine art as collapse, and I happen to know that it's a knock off. It's not what its represented to be and instead work being worth a hundred thousand dollars. It's actually worth you know a hundred bucks. if I know that and I hand you the thing- and I say I'm valuing at this at a hundred thousand, but you really ought to do your own due diligence yet I have given you notice that you should do your own investigation, but that doesn't make it right for me to represent that you know to misrepresent the value. So that's the judge's point, and I I think that you know just putting aside all the partisan of incentives here to give the.

Just do he's right about that. If you, if you know something, is worth acts and you represent to another party that it's worth ten times acts that's wrong, but when, whenever we talk about these kinds of matters, we have to consider prosecutor, oriole discretion right, there's all kinds of things that are technically wrong, that don't get prosecuted because no real harm gets done, and it certainly simply isn't the case that every time there is a technical infer, action of the kind that judge anger on is talking about that new york state jumps in an prosecutes. They don't and you know the other thing here- and this is. This is more, I think, a matter of my objection to the nanny state nature of all this, but does anyone really

think that that tis james is better at evaluating risk than jailing. Morgan chase, I mean you know these. These guys are the most sophisticated financial actors, that you're going to find more so than government bureaucrats, and they skin in the game which the government doesn't, so they wouldn't transacted withdrawal. Unless they thought it was safe to do it and they were going to make money and yet reason that nobody came forward? Is no one got hurt, yeah they knew they weren't dealing with george bailey in these and these transactions. But this this is what miles about now there, though right is, is sir, the theory that these- actual institution suffered a grievous financial harm from trauma It's overvaluation of his assets. Therefore trump his organization needed disgorge. This two hundred fifty million dollars it tis james's after yet

that's right and along those lines rich. I think james and anger on our hyper sensitive to trump's main claim here, which is that there were no victims which should be the beginning and end of all of this right and so what they wanted. I want to do is two things: one: they shut him down and they shut the defence, the trump defence down every time they point out that there was no victims every time Chris kind or alina harbour or any of trumps are the lawyers or trump himself make that obvious point which anyone who was representing a but a client in this kind of case would be hammering away at that day after day after day right every time they say that the judge it's all uppity and custom often says I've already ruled. This was fraud, I've already that we're only dealing now with the amount of so The on the one hand, was supposed to be having this trial about the amount and it

On the other hand, he saying that they can't challenge the fact that there was fraud so of huge. If you try to defend yourself from somebody saying that you defrauded someone to get out to the x amount and you're not even allowed to challenge whether it was actually fraud in the first place? What what do you have in the trial for it's just it's ridiculous, but the other thing they've done realising that it's a big hole in the case not to have victims is they're trying to invent victims. So they have said they had a young and expert witness in bank finance testify last week that, because trump overrated were overvalued his assets, he got a favourable interest rate on various loans that he wouldn't otherwise have gotten. If he had given the honest interest rate items, are the honest value

assessment and therefore, this guy computes that, based on his getting the interest rate that he should not otherwise have gotten because of his event valuation of assets he raped a hundred and your the bank's lost one hundred and sixty eight million dollars in interest payments that they would otherwise have gotten if trump had given them accurate figures. Now this is a pr. This is preposterous and as a theory for a variety of reasons, one is remembered. This is the case that the prosecutors turn their nose up at first. You know my old office was the first one, the federal prosecutors in the southern desert, the new york with the first one. I had this investigation and then, when they didn't take the case, because they didn't was anything there. Sigh vance later replaced as a boy.

I'll brag as too, as the district attorney of new york were not not once but twice to give final up to the supreme court to. Finally, when access to trumps financial records and then when they saw them, it turned out that, though the criminal case that they thought was there wasn't there, so they didn't pursue it. Do you think there is any chance? The prosecutors would not have pursued this case if they could approve the trump bill, ensure the banks and insurance companies out of a hundred and sixty eight million dollars in this way. been like this would have been the first meda gone after remember, Elvis regular brought the hush money case over a hundred and thirty thousand dollars. But nobody, actually lost any money on right right. So it's not like was too embarrassed to take even a crappy case here

Imagine there was a hundred and sixty eight million dollar fraud and he he didn't prosecuted or the southern district didn't prosecuted. Are you kidding so you? You should be suspicious about this claim in the first place, because it was obviously if it was true, though prosecutors would have jumped off but the thing is the bank's involved, never claimed that they were. Swindled and they would have sued if tromp had built them out of a hundred and sixty eight. million dollars in lost interest payments, theirs, Oh evidence in the record that if trump had told them what new york up says was the actual factual value with his assets that the banks would have offered

different interests terms, there's no evidence of that in the rendering is completely speculative. So you know that this idea that new york knows better than the bank's knew. What the end straight should have been in these transactions when these are arms length, transactions that we're done after the bank's did their due diligence about trumps assets is just ridiculous, but its clear the reason they are doing this the state is, that is, is that very sensitive to two trumps continue. Harangue that there were no victims here and that nobody got swindled. So they know it's a big in their case and now the troika. Basically, they are accusing trump of inventing wealth and their answer to that is to invent losses that nobody ever

and I was just ridiculous boroughs changing everything you know about furniture for one thing: every single order, ships free right, your door, each piece of borough furniture is designed with purpose and constructed from premium materials. It comes in easy to move boxes and can be assembled by one person. I know too. The necessary and decision we'll just as easily when you move save up to fifty percent during. rose biggest sale of a year plus get up to a thousand dollars off your purchase at burrowed, dotcom, slash s, exam baroque, dotcom, slash s, exam. so before we move on so real quick what state of play with with everything sars ruddy com or latest this stuff yesterday and and awestruck, trying to remind myself love the that the trial dates, or at least that the time frames are being sought by the prosecutors and in three of the four. felony cases They want to have them in march, generous ex case march hush money case march

very well since been petitioning four march as well. Now, obviously, you're not gonna have free trials. in march, in that the J sixfold will take precedence. But what? What what magic about march. Why does they want to go in march, because this was all done for twenty twenty four election purposes? So that's that's the time right, by march? Tromp? Has the young has denominate and sewed up, at least as I understand the primary calendar, so If you start a trial in march, especially you know, they're saying these trials are take about two months. The J six trial is the you know the election interference. One is obviously important one. so you would have. A situation seems to me. You would have situation, where trump is already the case.

Ok, nominee and in all, but like formal convention nomination right, but he's got he's got the delegates got it all. Wrapped up And it's always to my mind: it's always been at that point that the Democrats were hoping to launch. You know once once the republicans locked into trump, then that's when the deluge starts so the idea was to have these trials go and as far as smith is concerned, remember he pushed very hard to get first to get the our legal documents case locked into a may day, and then he pushed judge again the obama appointee in in the district of columbia, to give him the marched. I remember he first he peace. to get an earlier date, but he knew he wasn't gonna get that one. But the idea here is like a double whammy. You do the march trial that's gonna last.

what's in that goes right into the fabric into the year may trial, which will last another? You know six weeks to eight weeks and you try to get him convicted a two sets of felonies and in the meantime he's ready locked in is the rub, looking nominees. So now, all the bad stuff starts to come out at the trial and he gets convicted and we have like so far that we can, as we ve projected in of our prior podcast episodes about whether he would be in jail pending appeal and in jail. Pending sat said all that jazz, but I think that's, the the magic of march riches is dictated by the election calendar. Indeed,. I think all of this is dictated by the election calendar. I mean just think about the new york draw that we just talked about. Have you ever heard third in new york, the weight and civil justice works that could file a lawsuit in twenty twenty two and get to try?

Alan, twenty twenty three I mean in most low- so if you file in two thousand and twenty two you hope to be in court by like twenty thirty, if you're you know, depending on how or michael Mann lawsuit to it, took, took just ten years to get it dismissed. Still, I'm going to trial with the with mark stein is still at it. Yeah this

it's extraordinary, that these cases are what are going to trial and yet the democratic prosecutors who are bulb, who brought these cases, have all pushed very hard to get them on the calendar. For twenty twenty four- and I think we talked about this one or two podcasts ago, but do you know, judge chuck in keeps saying in Washington d c and that trump may be running for president, but his first amendment rights have to give way to the administration of justice of the trial. Now any good judge would say: wait a minute is away here too easily give trump his full run of first amendment rights and yet have perfect administrative justice of the trial, and that is put the trial off until after the election. Then let him campaign and

you have the trial and you can put whatever. Can you know whatever prohibition on him that you would put on a normal defended? But if you buy me but if he wins out, how can you treat him as a normal defended while that the evaluation is a long one. No, no one, not assuming you won't rich, I'm I'm assuming what the binding illustration always says, and what the justice department always says, which is that there are no polluted considerations, in other words, that the job of the courts and the justice department or to do justice in the legal proceedings it whether trump gets elected president or he doesn't get elected president they're, not supposed to calculate that they're not supposed to factor that in that her job right. It's not it's, not jack, smith's job to say, judge. I have to get this case to trial because of trump wins, would poured in himself and then I'll never get to trial. That's no! That's not a proper consideration for a prosecutor,

thank you. No job is not relent anarchy because it's got nothing to do with the justice system, a portance, a political act, but it is a political act of clemency by the president. You dont factor that in his secure do in the case I mean look. I have a little bit of experience with this. I happen to have, in one of my last cases that I handled the truck as a lawyer and le like a lawyer, hand in handling individual cases, I had susan, Rosenberg, more to get her of her persistence, reduced Susan Rosenberg was a weather underground. Terrorists who had been sentenced is over sixty years in prison and she tried to get her sentence. used, because she actually once she was sentenced in new jersey. She was never tried in the southern district and after

a year of litigation. I convince the judge to to keep her sentence intact, at which point Clinton pardoned her at the end of his term. That was always possible, but that could happen, but that could that wasn't would now been a proper consideration for me or for the judge. Not yet equally, we were shocked that had happened because it would you know Eric holder Clinton, had this little back door, pardon thing that they were doing, but it's not a proper consideration further for the prosecutor of the court that like it. That's in the political realm that that merit garland and Joe Biden and all the rest of them always say you know, there's a wall between politics and justice. We don't we not we're, not worried about that stuff. It's the only thing, that's drive and the stream when you talk about when trumps trials are being scheduled, every things being done according to the political calendar,

My toes pause right here, the media could blood for anna plus digital subscription serves at national review die. calm, your way around or meter pay walk your way. If you sign up and law again, to see about ninety percent fewer Your way, if you want to comment on articles and blot, thus get invited to exclusive answer our writers and editors and other conservative. Irs has a great deal all round if you haven't signed up already, please consider today, tomorrow or the day after joining tens of thousands of you fell nationally readers ass member an hour, plaza Andy. We have ongoing talk in the Gaza war, they pause, the cairo on that was on fox ripe, for I turned it off to to do this packet. The EU was negotiations ongoing over three day paused.

To allow for the release of the hostages and other things where you think a pause debate as well. I think it's unfortunate that The israelis are very dependent on support from the united states, so there being pressured into this, and what really bothers me about this right was a lot of things that should bother all of us, but what I would be ok, with this. If I thought that there was actually military, strategic or geopolitical strategic advantage in it like if there was a reason for it, but I don't think that's what's going on at all, I think Biden. feeling a lotta heat from the left and his poem where's away down and as a result of that, he needs to fit that he needs to look like he's putting pressure on the israelis and

you know it. They keep talking about Netanyahu, and I I just want to push back on that, Netanyahu, is not what he was before this all happened. This is a unity cabinet. He is one of three but he's become. You know, look east a lightning rod, so that he's the one they talk about all the time and But I think you have a situation where american, the politics of american election, rather than the geopolitical situation on the ground in the middle east or what's driving this strategic pause train because there's nothing strategic about a pa, on the circumstances where Israel has methodically gone and done it

great care trying to move civilians to to safety, to the extent that the civilians have not been allowed to go to safety. That's because Hamas, not israel Hamas went that Israel has had times in this option racial where they have tried to set up corridors for civilians too escape to safety in the south from the north of gaza, and these he troops have been shot on by jihadist, while they were doing that because, as we discussed a number of times civilian casualties, what they call civilian casualties, are more effective for hamas against Israel, then their jihadist combat operations And we're seeing this again did nothing. They could do in the way

of military type operations. Forcible operations could force israel to do with three day pause. When there were about to go into the city and root out the main of Hamas is headquarters there. The the way you could get a three day pause is by making it about the civilians. not it's not like Israel needs you. It's like Israel, it, the boxing analogy I get a guess, would be like a standing, a count its now. Like guess, reels getting pummelled and they need a standing. I can't write its hamas that needs the pause and the way they are getting. It is because You know the worry about civilian casualties he's the humanitarian disaster and notice when they talk

Who is in the agreement for the strategic pause? They talk about the united states, Israel and qatar, but nobody says Hamas which to me I think that's ok, because I think qatar is hammas. I think qatar as the muslim brotherhood and that we are deluding cells into thinking our enemy is our ally in this. But you know, the fact of the matter is, if you, even if you, if you want to pretend that you know Hamas is the combat and cutter. Just are you know our to media airy, performing a valuable so, was by helping us communicate with the enemy? Ok, fine, but Hamas is not going to agree to a pause. apostle, take advantage of the pause, but you can,

even negotiate with Hamas there a terrorist organisation right. So this whole thing is just ridiculous, but its being driven by american politics, it's not being driven by the needs of the military needs on the and so we ve had a little action. We have some more air strikes. Tit for tat, style and syria, I believe overall yesterday, and this. larger debate or maybe non debate about iran's role in all this The non debate is really, I mean it serve. If you took a step back and thought about it, which we wires thought, because it is, the media is reporting on it. It's really stunning, Hamas, killed thirty three americans on october seventh. To put that into context

the world trade center bombing and ninety. Ninety three, which I was involved in the prosecution of that was six americans, were kill, one of them, was a woman who was in the last stages of pregnancy. But we're talking about you know said, times or doing the math wrong. But you get the point. I mean many times the number of casualties, the number of deaths, cobalt towers, attack. We lost eighteen members of the? U s and nineteen, I'm sorry, members of the! U s air force, the coal bombing In two thousand, we lost seventy members of the EU s navy. This attack is bigger than but in terms of americans killed? This attack is much bigger than those attacks, its bigger than ford hood.

Its bigger than san bernardino, its bigger than all these infamous terrorist attacks. And yet there was no. When one october, seventh is, discussed and even when you, you know, but rarely get attention to the fact that a rat, is pulling the strings on Hamas. Nobody can exercise since as ran, is just killed. Thirty three americans, through its proxies they are holding at least ten american hostages, I think the reason the media isn't covering this is Jimmy. The presidency was essentially destroyed by an iranian hostage crisis. I mean a lot of other problems with it as well, but that was the signal issue and they don't want to play it up the binding. thracian, doesn't want to discuss it because they have this vision of

rearranging the geopolitical chessboard in the Middle east, so that ran is empowered. As a different role. I dont think that Biden has abandoned that even now but the main reason they don't want to talk about. It is donald trump. You know if you had the kind of drumbeat enrich you remember with the coverage was like I mean I was I was in no, I think, our second third year of love of college. At the time, But the drumbeat every day about the iranian hostages destroyed the card as presidency you just I mean it destroyed it, and they don't want to have that happen again, because they think that that will help trumps other suppressing this issue in the meantime. We ve had forty one attacks so far and their picking up

in at least numerous the number of them is picking up. Are we had more, I think last week and we ve had in any other way so far no serious casualties As we understand it, there's been forty six american servicemen have been injured, the military, now concedes that twenty five of them have suffered traumatic brain injuries, but there not saying you know how serious those are like whether there bombs on the head or something something worse. you know it's only a matter of time which, if you could pick this, is going to continue before something really terrible happens, yeah and we ve done nothing in response to it to you know, materially of it, we should take out a couple of tankers and just say if you want more, let us now, though, there'll be much more where that comes from a few.

You wanna, I well look. I also think that the iranians have to be made to know that this doctrine we fall since the Iraq war that their territory is, is a safe haven. Forget it you know I would to. I would take out a few things in Iraq and I mean in a ran run. I mean, I think they have to feel vulnerable, which they don't Finally, what is your take on this extraordinary phenomenon spent, evident for a couple weeks now, where The white house asked about anti semitism, I say that's pretty bad but islamophobia in their there go to Islam. Phobia had this terrible case, obviously, where this not job murdered. A young muslim boys horrifying otherwise, what what we're seeing on on the streets, you know it's, not muslim people being beaten up. Anyone would would want that that would be terrible or being intimidated. It's all going

not the other way ass, all directed at Jews, but they, the white house, can't bring itself just to say: ok, yeah, anti semitism, that's really bad period and a story islamophobia and associated hatreds, always have to be late like to it look, I think chris re test, fight about a week ago right, there were rum that jews made up two percent, population and they suffer sixty percent of the of the hate violence. The category of hate violence that they that they talk about some of those attacks and I'm sure He. He was not most popular guy in the by the administration for pointing that out, but I think we're rich that this is really kind of the flip side of what happened in the obama Biden, administration began in two thousand nine when counter

terrorism in the united states was no longer allowed to be called counter terrorism in the government. They officially changed the national security strategy to something they call countering violent. Remove the word. Terrorism was out and the reason the word terrorism without just like the word jihadist was out and Mujahideen was out and willows other. You know we had a whole glossary of things. We weren't a lot to say any more right, but scripturally probably heard this a million times presenting the evidence in my while back in the nineties, the the koran instructs and they had death in drugs jihadis to strike terror into the heart of the enemies of Islam, its yards or like a million times, the the the people who, like the blind, shake, who render the script

is young muslim men a at that again and again and again to the point that in night in in the night beginning in the ninety nineties. But this goes back to Hezbollah. In the eightys it became it became almost redundant to talk about islamic terrorism, because terrorism conveyed the idea that we're talking about jihadism, because it happened frequently enough in their work and the attacks were increasingly audacious. so the obama administration, which was threaded with people who came from islamist organizations that were connected to the muslim brotherhood and and the obama administration. Furthermore, had formal and informal all relations ships are with the gun

or of these big islamic organizations that were connected to the muslim brotherhood, those those operatives in the government and those organizations punched way above their weight. They got the obama administration to strike terrorism out of vocabulary in the national security space and they changed it to violent extremism. They made it very clear when they choose the nomenclature that what they were too avoid was any association of Islam with terrorism or with with violence, because as long as religion, a peace and they warrant the first one to two say that, obviously that was that was rhetoric that was popular in the bush administration as well, but they formerly the obama administration, did

broke that the time between the idea of terrorism and any association with Islam. That was the reason for changing to violent extremism, and that was a reason for purging thee national security agencies, meaning the justice department. The fbi military, intelligence or other until since agencies all these guys who were instructors in real supremacist ideology and the connection between the commands of the brochure and the violence that we were seeing again and again and again, those people wish were basically cashier. They were out the violent extremism strategy, instructed people, We were not to look at the ideological underpinnings of violence,

is any ideology. If it was taken to an extreme could cause violence. That was the that was the whole idea. So. You know when they, when they now have to feel like they have to acknowledge anti semitism. They have couple it with islamophobia to be consistent with what they ve been doing since two thousand nine, because the whole idea was to purge any trace of not just the use of force, but the incense to use force from islamic ideology and they're. Just this is just doing what they are doing now is just the flip side of that and the cause of it, I think, is that very, very influenced into including in personnel who work not only it.

White house, but mainly for democrats in washington, but their very influenced by. these people who are on their staff in these people who are connected to these brotherhood organizations and that's just stated they punch way above their their weight policy, wise and You know back in the old days again they got, they got even word. Terrorism struck from our counter tell our counter terrorism strategy was no longer able to say terrorism, and now you and say anti semitism. Unless you add islamophobia, for the same reasons, are all the time we have this podcast had been produced by the incomparable Sarah should he thinks I want for listening and thank you and of arthur thanks, rich