Sean Hannity CANCELS Geraldo Rivera


>>Geraldo has disagreed with other personalities
on Fox News when it comes to war with Iran. In fact, there was a video that went viral,
where he is saying it’s a terrible idea to escalate tensions with Iran and Brian Kilmeade
went at it with him. Now, recently he was supposed to make an appearance
on Hannity show, but that appearance was cancelled. And it seems like it was cancelled specifically
because Geraldo was gonna continue making the case that war with Iran is a bad idea. So he starts off with this tweet. Urging Donald Trump to keep his powder dry,
please don’t let this spin out of control. You can always hit them back. Please don’t let this become an escalating,
you hit me, I hit you back harder until we have another full blown, bloody Mid East war
on our hands. What would we win? And so then he ends up responding to someone
who apparently liked his tweet and he says, thanks. I’ll be on with Sean Hannity tonight counseling
restraint and talking about these deeply disturbing developments. And then later he said, Nevermind, Hannity
just canceled me. And I just like to end this whole exchange
with Malcolm Fleschner tweet, cancel culture strikes again.>>I really liked that tweet. So look, before we open this up for discussion,
I just wanna remind you of how passionately Geraldo feels about avoiding war with Iran. This was a segment that Fox had earlier. Take a look.>>Now we have taken this huge military escalation. Now I fear the worst. You’re gonna see the US markets go crazy today. You’re gonna see the price of oil spiking
today. This is a very, very big deal.>>And I don’t know if you heard
>>But this isn’t about his resume of blood and death, it is about what was next. We stopped the next attack, that’s what I
think you’re missing.>>According to the Secretary of State.>>By what credible source,
>>Okay.>>Can you predict what the next Iranian move
would be?>>They’ve been excellent, the US Intelligence
has been excellent since 2003, when we invaded Iraq, disrupted the entire region for no real
reason. Don’t for a minute start cheering this on. What you have done, what we have done, we
have unleashed.>>I will cheer
>>Then you, like Lindsay Graham, have never met a war you didn’t like.>>That is not true, and don’t even say that.>>If President Trump wanted de-escalation-
>>We should just let him kill us for another 15 years.>>If President Trump wanted de-escalation
and to bring our troops home. What this was a reaction to-
>>What about the 700 Americans who are dead? Should they not be happy because of him?>>What about the tens of thousands of Iraqis
who have died since 2003? You have to start seeing things. What the hell are we doing in Baghdad in the
first place? Why are we there? Why aren’t these forces home?>>You’re blaming President Bush for the maniacal
killing of Saddam Hussein?>>I am blaming President Bush in 2003 for
those fake weapons of mass destruction that never existed and the con job that drove us
into that war.>>Listen, you gotta give people credit when
they’re right, and Geraldo was right there. I think that he took a strong position. I also give Geraldo credit for consistently
speaking out against Donald Trump’s disgusting immigration policies on Fox. I’m sure that’s not an easy environment to
share your accurate opinions in. But yeah, so Hannity canceled. Now, who knows? Maybe they canceled him to maybe replace that
segment with something that involves a legal analyst or?>>I don’t know, should we give Hannity the
benefit of the doubt?>>Hannity did not want any of that smoke. He’s like man, I saw what you did to kill
me. And I don’t think any more clearly than he
does. His producers probably said hey, we’re gonna
go ahead and cancel Geraldo because first off, Geraldo’s only mistake was revealing
what he wanted to do that night. When he talked to the person who retweeted
him or liked it and he goes, thanks I’m gonna be on later to make sure I council against
this. They’re like no that’s not the agenda tonight. That’s not what we’re on board for. Of course, yes again we’re speculating. But I mean, if it’s not the case, go and let
us know what the other difference was. I mean, they canceled on me tonight so I can’t
come on and say what I had to say. So I mean, again, what’ll happen is you end
up revealing what your real intentions are and what your real beliefs are. And people on the region are like, well, 700
Americans were lost. You don’t care about the Americans being lost
when it comes to anything else except for pursuing war. And then so, of course, when Geraldo brings
up the tens of thousands of Iraqis dying, there’s no answer to that. Those aren’t real people? Those are casualties of war. Or when we talk about how we wanna make sure
we keep American troops out of harm’s way. They go hey, well American troops they signed
up for it. They knew what they were getting themselves
into. Somehow when it comes to having any kinda
empathy towards people it’s all based on whether or not you’re falling not behind this president
and his line of ridiculousness. Secondly, Geraldo use Trump’s talking point
about we gotta get out of these stupid wars. You can’t follow a guy who continues to contradict
his own agenda and policies throughout his presidency.>>Right, exactly. And look, it’s hilarious to me to hear anyone
on Fox News or even anyone in cable news talk about how egregious it is or how much of an
injustice it is when Americans die. When in our own country they constantly push
for domestic policy that leads to more Americans dying.>>Totally, my god.>>I mean, how many American die every year
because they don’t have adequate health insurance? And they will attack Universal Healthcare,
over and over again. They’ll talk about how we can’t afford it,
can’t pay for it. When it comes to beating that war-drum, by
the way, which is the most expensive policy to support, they’re all for it. They don’t care about American lives. American’s overall, just like troops are nothing
more than pawns, nothing more than props, that these lowly individuals use to make their
arguments when it’s convenient for them. But when push comes to shove, you think they
really care about the lives of Americans? How about all those segments that Fox News
has done on homeless people? Do they care about them? They defame them, they slander them as dead
beats, as druggists, as all sorts of things. They don’t care about human lives. What cares about is appeasing Trump, making
sure that Trump is happy with him. Because you never know, you might lose access
to Trump if you criticize him. And you might not be able to get a job in
Trump’s administration. We all know that Trump likes to pick people
out of Fox News. So it’s just gross. And look, not to get too leftist, I guess,
whatever you wanna call it. But that’s what capitalism is, that’s what
capitalism does. It’s all about profit, it’s all about ensuring
that you have the upper hand and you increase your chances of making more money, right? That’s what happens in our media all the time,
right?>>Making money and being a tough guy, that’s
the other part of it. Even people who don’t have, I guess, the interests
for lining their pockets. It’s, hey, we’re tough guys, we’re America. Hey, we don’t let them F with us like this. Hey, you’re not gonna say that to me. There’s a superiority complex that we have
from the moment that we’re born that says, we have to make sure that we talk about how
much better we are than you no matter what. You can be on the lowest totem pole in America. But you’re like, I’m an American, I’m better
than you. But your life actually has nothing to do with
this American dream that they’ve sold you. That you’re supposed to somehow pursue. And one more thing that they don’t care about
lives for is school shootings, mass shootings, Car Club shootings. We don’t care about that stuff, thoughts and
prayers. What bombs we dropping on people to stop that
from happening? American lives are being lost every day. You don’t care about American lives.>>Again, it’s just something that they cite
when it’s convenient to them to support a policy that’s horrendous, usually. And, in this case, it’s escalated tensions
and war with Iran. So, again, credit where credit is due. I think Geraldo is doing a good job. And I think that he should be proud of the
fact that Hannity canceled his appearance, right? Look, I don’t know what his future is gonna
look like. Obviously, Shep Smith, who had the audacity
to speak the truth every once in a while on Fox News is no longer there. But we know what Fox News is, Geraldo knows
what Fox News is. I don’t agree with Geraldo on many issues. But if you have any integrity and you actually
want to share truthful analysis with an audience, Fox News is not the place to do it. You’re hardly even seen on cable news shows
period, much less on Fox News.

Lindsey Graham REAL SALTY About War Powers Act


>>The House of Representatives has just approved
a resolution that Mike Lee in favor of. Its the War Powers Act, that would limit Donald
Trump’s ability to unilaterally go to war. And of course, this follows Trump’s decision
to assassinate Iran’s top military general. Now this is non-binding at the moment, and
look, let’s keep it real. The likelihood of Mitch McConnell even bringing
this type of legislation up for a vote in the Senate is, I can’t even imagine that would
happen. But it is important to note that there are
Republicans who are supportive of this including Mike Lee and Rand Paul. But there are Republicans who are vehemently
against it, and are speaking out against their fellow republicans who dare to question Trump
and his unilateral ability to go to war with any country he pleases. So first let’s go to Senator Lindsey Graham
who loves going to war, and would like the idea of Donald Trump, starting another one. Here’s what he had to say about Senators Mike
Lee and Rand Paul.>>And they’re overreacting quite frankly. go debate all you want to, I’m gonna debate
you. Trust me, I’m gonna let people know that at
this moment in time to play this game with a War Powers Act which I think is unconstitutional. Is that whether you mean to or not, you’re
empowering the enemy. You can have 535 commander in chiefs. The War Powers Act design constitutional,
there’s only one commander chief. If you don’t like the action, the Commander
in Chief is taking as Congress, you could defend those actions. We have control of the power of the purse,
but they’re great Americans. But when we get on the floor of the United
States Senate and the next couple weeks, and talking about restricting the ability to deal
with the religious Nazis and Iran. It will be seen by the Iranians as division
at home, I hope we won’t do it.>>Now the War Powers Resolution is not unconstitutional. In fact, I’m gonna go ahead, and read you
a portion from the constitution that is relevant to this conversation. Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution
stipulates that Congress shall have power to declare war, grant letters of marque and
reprisal. And make rules concerning captures on land
and water, to raise and support armies. And also to make rules for the government
and regulation of the land and naval forces.>>That could mean anything.>>That’s weird, it’s weird that he would
call it unconstitutional when it’s part of our constitution. Now the resolution that just passed in the
House, I wanna give you a few more details about it. As I mentioned earlier it’s non-binding on
the president and would not require his signature. But house speaker Nancy Pelosi nonetheless
insisted it has real teeth, because it is a statement of the Congress of the United
States.>>Yeah.>>I can’t believe that she would think that’s
true.>>I think that she believes that she needs
to pretend that she thinks it’s true. And which is disappointing because I think
that the situation we find ourselves in almost every way is terrible, and I wish that we
weren’t there. I wish that Donald Trump had acted differently
or not acted at all. But I do think that has provided an opening,
we know that two out of three Americans think that the killing of Soleimani has made the
US less safe. I think that we’re seeing in the news just
today a demonstration of how theoretically we might be less safe. I think that, that situation the fact that
the people don’t want a war with Iran combined with Donald Trump’s speech where he wants
to pretend that he’s interested in peace and diplomacy. Creates an opening where you can put way more
pressure on Donald Trump and the Republicans not just to limit their ability to start a
war in the future. But say okay, if you want peace, if you want
diplomacy, we want diplomatic talks by this date. We want you to pull out of the region by this
time. We think well if you want peace, then we certainly
don’t need to be spending so much money abroad. Then let’s talk about dialing down the military
budget being spent overseas like if the people don’t want a->>That’s hilarious, John.>>I know it’s ridiculous-
>>And I know that most of the Democrats don’t even support it but-
>>Right.>>If he wants peace, if his base even some
of them want peace, certainly the voters in general want peace. Then let’s push for actual peace not just
a little bit more red tape for him to go through if he wants to bomb Tehran.>>Also, I would argue that Democrats should
have thought about the future when Obama was president. Because they were fine with President Obama
making decisions unilaterally when it came to what was going on in the Middle East. That was exactly when democrats should have
like thought ahead of time, and limited the powers of the executive branch to unilaterally
make these types of decisions. And so-
>>Yeah.>>And look, Obama was, I’m not even gonna
say he was like more responsible. I mean, he expanded Bush era foreign policy
and expanded the drone wars. I mean, we didn’t go into Yemen for the first
time under Trump’s leadership, that started under Obama. And so we have to hold our own party accountable,
and I know that we do that here on the show on a regular basis, but I’m talking about
Democrats, right? We need to be aware of the flaws in our own
party, and we need to demand more. And I know that people like Nancy Pelosi are
very uncomfortable, and get very offended by that. But you should read my latest op ed in the
hill. So you can see how she enables Donald Trump
more than anyone, right->>Take a look maybe sure.>>Yeah, actually, you tweeted it out. So you guys should check out his Twitter account,
I think I might have too.>>I have one coming up in the next few days
actually, about this very topic.>>I love it. Well, let’s go to Mike Lee, because he actually
responded to Lindsey Graham’s nonsense.>>If that is fundamentally antithetical to
the Constitution. Look, I love Lindsey Graham, he’s a fantastic
guy. We work closely together on a lot of issues. He’s dead wrong insofar as he’s suggesting
that this is playing a game. Mr. Graham, the Constitution of the United
States is not a game. In federal of 69, Alexander Hamilton explained,
why it is that we put the war declaration power in Article 1, Section 8? Why we put it with congress rather than the
executive? There are good reasons for that, and those
reasons need to be respected.>>So he makes good points there, so does
Ron Paul in this next video.>>I think it’s sad when people have this
fake sort of drape of patriotism, and anybody that disagrees with them is not a patriot. Look, I love my country, I have many family
members who have served in the military, and continue to serve in the military. I love my country as much as the next guy,
but for him to insult and say that somehow we’re not as patriotic as he is. He hasn’t even read the history of the Constitution. The Constitution specifically says that the
war making power is resides in Congress. He believes in this unitary theory of the
executive that presidents can do whatever they want. The only way you can stop them is by defending
a war. That’s not what our founding fathers said. It’s not what the Constitution says. And he insults the Constitution, our founding
fathers. And what we do stand for in this republic
by making light of it, and accusing people of lacking patriotism. I think that’s a low, gutter type of response.>>But I do have criticism for Rand Paul and
Mike Lee. While they might be right on this specific
issue, they have been enabling Donald Trump over, and over, and over again. They’ve been defending him, and his lies his
wrongdoings as executive, or Commander in Chief over and over again. And so they even did it after making these
types of statements because look, what do they care about? What do lawmakers unfortunately care about
more than anything else, their political careers? And when you go up against Donald Trump, there
are consequences if you’re a Republican. And so they have to add all these caveats
about Lindsey Graham, and specifically Donald Trump when they dare to cross him on issues
like war. Take a look.>>We’re not quite at war, and I hope that
this will be an isolated killing. And look, I’m a fan of the president. I think the president is showing remarkable
restraint in many areas of foreign policy, but on the idea of who has the power,
>>Congress only wields the power to declare war. Now look, I support President Trump, I support
the way that he has wielded his power as Commander in Chief. I think he’s actually been the most respectful
of all presidents during my lifetime of the commander in chief power. I do think that the people who briefed the
United States Senate today->>And who are they just so people at home-
>>Hello, me wrong, I love Donald Trump. He’s a he’s shown remarkable restraint. He’s so good, I mean, he’s the best. Yeah, you went on an international tour talking
about how amazing Kim Jong Hoon is. And they write each other love letters, and
he’s he should have all the time but he’s a remarkable president. He’s incredible, please, please don’t come
at me. Don’t come at me, Trump. Don’t tweet about me, please.>>What a couple a weenie is?>>Yeah, come on! Just you’re finally sticking up for something. You’re finally making a strong statement that
needs to be said as Republicans, right? You don’t need to qualify it by pretending
like Donald Trump is a rational human being who deserves to lead this country.>>Yeah, I don’t no which is more pathetic. So Rand Paul with his, I’m a fan of him stuff. He’s stood on the debate stage and he made
fun of your hair said you were ugly. We should choose our leaders for their intelligence
experience and all of that stuff. But stop being such a little weenie seriously. This is why you didn’t go anywhere in the
primary. So that’s like a personal thing where you
continue to suck up this guy that MIT like mocked him viciously. It’s the Ted Cruz level of deference. But for Mike Lee, what he wanted to have you
believe is he came out of that briefing, he was just red hot mad at how they wouldn’t
answer any of his questions. And they were clearly hiding things and he
didn’t like how they respond to his hypotheticals. But Trump is great, it’s just that the people
in the briefing, they disappointed me and probably Trump too. Well, who do you think told them what to say? You think that they were like, what were they
backstabbing Trump. Trump was like I want you to go there and
tell good Mike Lee everything he wants to hear. And then they were like screw Trump. We’re not telling them, anything. No, they don’t have anything, if they’re lying
it’s because they’re all lying. But he wants to pretend that I’m pointing
out all out there clearly hoodwinking the American people but Trump’s good. Don’t get mad at him. Doesn’t make any sense?>>It makes no sense. They wanna have their cake and eat it, too.>>Well, they want to have their cake, and
not be kicked out of the Republican party while eating it basically.>>Yeah, that’s what I mean like they want
to hold Trump accountable without really holding Trump accountable. You can’t do that. This started by Donald Trump. This entire escalation is Trump’s fault. Okay, the lack of intelligence that was cited
by Trump is Trump’s fault. The intelligence didn’t exist. He made a unilateral decision, and then he
and his administration tried to make excuses for it or justify it after the fact. That is exactly what happened. They know it, and enabling him in this situation,
enabling him and everything else he’s done as President, right? Enables him to continue acting this way with
no consequences. So if you’re gonna have a backbone and you’re
going to call him out, then do it appropriately, even if it means that you might lose your
political career. Because the whole point of having members
in Congress represent us is to have leaders represent us. Being a leader is not easy. Being a leader doesn’t mean that you do what’s
beneficial for yourself in your career. Being a leader means that you lead, you do
what’s difficult, and you do what’s principled. And Republicans have shown us over and over
again, that while they talk about how strong they are, and how patriotic they are, they
are the biggest powers in this country. Because they will bow down to power if it
means that they get to preserve their precious career.

Fox Host Does The Unthinkable, Defends Obama


>>Brian Kilmeade strangely decided to defend
Barack Obama. Now, this is in response to all the right
wingers who have been blaming Obama for the escalated tensions with Iran. When in reality, as we know, Donald Trump
started escalating tensions with Iran the moment he pulled out of the Iran Nuclear Deal,
started implementing these crippling economic sanctions on Iran. And then he later assassinated Iran’s top
military general. But here’s Brian Kilmeade, speaking out against
all the right wingers who are trying to deflect and place the blame on Obama as opposed to
Trump.>>I just don’t love bringing up the previous
administration, just like I didn’t like when President Obama kept bringing up President
Bush.>>Yeah, but it’s true.>>But it’s how do you know? Well, what I’m trying to say is with President
Bush, you heard that statement all along from President Obama. All was a dumb war, as people who were missing
limbs and no longer can see or missing legs. And here, it’s a dumb war they lost their
limbs in->>Brian, they got 150 billion dollars weapon.>>Well, that’s fine, everybody knows that
policy. But you gotta bring people together as the
president and just to continue to take shots at President Obama-
>>Because I think it’s->>Three and half years later, it doesn’t
make any sense.>>It’s a stupid show.>>Now, understand that Brian Kilmeade was
supportive of Trump’s actions. He defended Trump and his decision to assassinate
Soleimani. And he got into this giant argument with Geraldo
Rivera about it. Geraldo Rivera was critical of what Trump
did. And so he’s not speaking out against what
Trump did, but he is speaking out against people who are blaming Obama for what’s going
on with Iran.>>Yeah, but look, if that was the extent
of it, I would say, look at Brian Kilmeade, able to add a little bit of nuance and in
favor of someone who normally disagrees with him. But everything else he added on to it made
me think no, I don’t actually like this at all.>>I agree, I agree, yeah.>>I mean, look, he came out looking better
than Doocy, that’s a high bar for you right there. But no, he said let’s not bring up past administrations
in some sort of weird general DC. Let’s all be polite and always looking forward,
no analysis of what actually has been done. When he said don’t call a war dumb because
have died and lost limbs, what are you talking about? That’s one of the reasons it was so stupid
and pointless and shouldn’t have been fought. That’s not mocking those who fought in it,
that’s speaking with compassion about the suffering that they went through that shouldn’t
have ever happened. And we don’t say it just because we like judging
past actions. We wanna stop future stupid, pointless wars,
like the one that Brian Kilmeade was, he said, I’m cheering for a couple of days ago when
he was arguing with Geraldo.>>Right.>>I don’t wanna have another argument in
ten years looking back on all the people have died in the US-Iran war. I wanna avoid it altogether.>>That’s the reason why we need to be serious
in electing the right person to lead this country this year. Now with that said, I do wanna go a little
back in time. These are clips from the past week where right
wingers on Fox, on Kilmeade’s very network, decided to place the blame on Obama. Let’s start off with Pete Hegseth.>>Listen, this instant, this moment right
now is on Barack Obama, not Donald Trump. When Barack Obama retreated in Iraq and created
a vacuum, he unleashed two radical forces. First ISIS, which President Trump had to come
in and eradicate, but he also opened the door for Iran’s influence to totally take over
Iraq. To the point where now the legislature in
Iraq is effectively controlled by Iran. If we couldn’t solve the problem in Iraq with
150,000 troops and the right strategy, we’re not gonna do it now with 5,000. So whether we leave Iraq or not should be
done on our terms and based on how we stare down Iran and their ability to get the nuclear
bomb.>>Iraq called on the United States and Iran
to help them defeat ISIS in their country. That’s the reason why the United States sent
troops back to Iraq. That’s the reason why Iran sent its forces
to Iraq in order to help defeat ISIS, and they actually did a pretty good job in that. And so now following Donald Trump’s actions,
in doing a drone strike in Iraq, the parliament in the country decided to take a vote and
they want US troops out. All of the escalation, as of late, is what
Trump is responsible for. There was a perfectly fine nuclear deal. It’s a nuclear deal because it was specifically
meant to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons.>>And it was working.>>And it was working, they were complying. When he decided to pull out, implement sanctions
and continuously provoke Iran, that’s when things started to get worse.>>Yes.>>So no, this isn’t about Obama, it’s been
three and a half years. What do you mean?>>Yeah, no, it’s not Obama. Actually, I blame Calvin Coolidge. No, I don’t know, we can just keep going back. You know what? It was George W Bush because-
>>And Obama was terrible, by the way.>>If he hadn’t started this war, then we
wouldn’t be there. No, actually it was Clinton because if he’d
taken out Sadam the first time then Bush wouldn’t have had to go in. You could just always keep passing the buck
to the past, it doesn’t mean anything. But that’s what Pete Hegseth does. There’s a couple different brands of horrible
right wing pundit and I would argue that he’s probably the worst. He comes from the Sean Hannity school where
his brain is only large enough for one running algorithm at a time. And it’s, how do I blame a democrat for whatever
it is? Even if it’s a direct predicted result of
a republican action, he’s gonna find a way. He’ll say, it was the democrats fault, throw
a couple of buzzwords out there and that’s it. And so it’s no wonder that he’s doing well
on Fox News. That’s all they need to do.>>That’s right, and there was one other person
on Fox News who wanted to blame Obama. That was Laura Ingraham.>>Whereas, Bush was too idealistic about
what was possible in Iraq, and whereas Obama was too defeatist about Iran, Trump’s a realist. He’s a pragmatist.>>So that’s the stupidity that you hear on
Fox.>>By the way, she was an outspoken advocate
for the war in Iraq.>>100%.>>Just don’t ever forget that, that she was
cheerleading for the war in Iraq. She wants to pretend that that’s not the case. And by the way, she also just coincidentally
wants war with Iran. But it’ll be totally different, it’ll be way
better this time. She’s a realist after all.>>It’s insane. By the way, Vickie, one of our members wrote
in and said, John’s got his energy back with lots of exclamation marks.>>I think I’m at the exact perfect point
of all the medications have lined up, but I am still on a lot of medication.>>And I also wanna announce that he’s starting
to get me sick, so I’m really looking forward to this weekend.>>You can’t prove that. It’s possible, I think Barrack Obama got you
sick, actually.>>It was, you know what, good point, good
point. Become a member, go to tyt.com/join. Members help to make this show happen, you
keep us sustainable, which is why I want to include your comments in the context of the
stories that we do.

Megyn Kelly To Kaepernick: “Everything is Racist”


>>Megyn Kelly hasn’t really been out in the
public much lately. But she did decide to respond to Colin Kaepernick’s
tweets about US aggression toward Iran. So first, let me give you what Colin Kaepernick
had tweeted, and then I’ll give you her response. She said, there’s nothing new about American
terrorist attacks against black and brown people for the expansion of American imperialism. America has always sanctioned and besieged
black and brown bodies both at home and abroad. American militarism is the weapon wielded
by American imperialism, to enforce its policing and plundering of the non white world. Now-
>>Yep.>>Anyone who knows anything about American
history and American foreign policy sees what he’s talking about here. This isn’t simply about race. This is about US foreign policy toward countries
that are typically majority black or majority brown, right?>>Yep.>>And why, why do they do that? And I’m gonna fill in those blanks in just
a second. But Megyn Kelly, in her lack of sophisticated
thinking says, because everything is racist. Everything. Even fighting back against terrorists who
kill Americans. Nike, feeling proud? Okay, so if you’re so concerned about terrorists
killing Americans or terrorists killing people that they shouldn’t be killing. How about the fact that Donald Trump defended
Mohammed bin Salman after he ordered the killing of a US resident and Washington Post journalist
Jamal Khashoggi. Didn’t bother you, right? Didn’t bother you. I mean, it’s just such a disingenuous argument. And besides which, Colin Kaepernick is actually
making an important point that isn’t often made by public figures, especially people
in the entertainment industry or in athletics. Colin Kaepernick comments about things that
are so important to shed light on. And US imperialism is incredibly important
to discuss, especially in the context of what the United States is doing in the Middle East
right now. So for anyone who maybe didn’t have, and most
people in America didn’t, the appropriate history lessons about what the US has done
with coups abroad. We’ll do a quick run through of it. And I wish we had more time cuz there’s so
many interesting details to every single one of these examples, but we’re just gonna run
through some of the examples right now. So first off, when it comes to Latin American
countries, our CIA has loved orchestrating coups. We have orchestrated coups in Argentina, Brazil,
Cuba, Chili, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, Uruguay, okay? Now, we attempt to stage a coup in Cuba, we
failed there. So we weren’t successful in every single
case, but every single time you see this happen, especially in Latin American countries, there
are US business interests involved, right? It’s not because we’re trying to spread democracy. It’s because there’s some sort of resource
that the United States government wants access to. So we’ve done coups in countries like Iran. So in 1953 there was a coup in Iran. It was orchestrated by the United States. Despite continued speculation about the CIA’s
role in a 1949 coup to install a military government in Syria, the ouster of Iranian
Prime Minister Mohamed Mossadegh is the earliest coup of the Cold War that the United States
government has acknowledged. They’ve acknowledged it, okay? But you don’t hear much of it in US history
classes. In 1953, after nearly two years of Mossadegh’s
premiership, during which he challenged the authority of the Shah and nationalized an
Iranian oil industry previously operated by British companies, he was forced from office
and arrested, spending the rest of his life under house arrest. Did you think that you could just nationalize
your country’s oil and the US would let you get away with it? We don’t think so. Let’s move on. Guatemala, 1954, though the United States
was initially supportive of Guatemalan Guatemalan President Arbenz, the State Department felt
his rise through the US-trained and armed military would be an asset, the relationship
though soured as he attempted a series of land reforms that threatened the holdings
of US-owned United Fruit Company. A coup in 1954 forced him from power, allowing
a succession of juntas in his place. Classified details of the CIA’s involvement
in the ouster of the Guatemalan leader, which included equipping rebels and paramilitary
troops while the US Navy blockaded the Guatemalan coast, came to light in 1999. I mean, the examples go on and on and on. Congo in 1960, what we did to Patrice Lumumba. I mean, how many more examples do you want,
okay?>>I think she doesn’t want any.>>I’m sorry, Lumumba, Lumumba.>>And I would argue she probably doesn’t
care.>>But that’s what I wanna know. Look, Megyn Kelly’s not dumb. I don’t think she’s a dumb person. She’s a lawyer. She worked her way up to pretty lucrative
gigs at Fox News and then I think it was CBS or NBC.>>Well, no offense to us, but being a host
doesn’t necessarily mean you’re a genius.>>No, I get that. I get that.>>She had a public spat about how Santa’s
white. She’s kind of dumb when it comes to racial
stuff.>>You’re right. You’re right. Right.>>To hold these simplistic, stupid, bigoted
views on race you can’t be that intelligent.>>You guys, the United States will go into
countries and overthrow democratically elected leaders. We just did it in Bolivia. We just did it in Bolivia. We will do that. We will go into a sovereign country, overthrow
a democratically elected leader for our own business interests. So when someone draws attention to that because
they want our country to be better, to keep our country safe, to keep sovereign countries
safe and democratic, it’s a dumb ass response to say because everything’s racist.>>Yeah, it’s hard to be Megyn Kelly. When you say bigoted things people call you
a racist, it’s rough.>>That’s the woman who gets paid tens of
millions of dollars to be an idiot, it’s devastating. That’s what this country values.>>She’s so awful that she makes me like Charlize
Theron less.>>No, don’t say that.>>Although Bombshell was pretty good.>>It was okay.>>Yeah, it was fine.>>Charlize Theron is a national treasure.>>She is, exactly.>>Yeah.>>Yeah, she’s as bad as she ever was when
she was on Fox News. She somehow managed as she like pulled the
ripcord, got out of there, to seem more reasonable than someone like a Sean Hannity or Bill O’Reilly,
but she’s not. She was picked for that position because she
believes the same sorts of things that they do.>>I want to give some snaps to Colin Kaepernick
because what he was drawing attention to there is important. And a lot of people in America never get the
appropriate schooling or learn the appropriate history of what our country has done. And you need to understand the history to
really dissect and understand what our current foreign policy is. We should be able to hold our elected officials
to a higher standard, and we should not allow them to sell us this nonsense about how the
US government is looking to spread democracy abroad. When in reality, we’ve done a lot to undermine
democracy in other countries consistently over the decades.

Trump Unintelligible in Rambling Press Conference


Donald Trump yesterday had a press availability,
I guess we would call it at the white house. This was before Iran attacked two U S military
bases in Iraq. And it was a strange sort of gong show, combination of rambling, confusing
and dishonest. And it’s becoming increasingly embarrassing to be a Trump supporter now to,
to normal people. That is, I think within their, you know, cult Trump supporters, uh,
during, within the world of the cult Trump supporter. They’re probably still pretty outwardly
happy with their choice, at least as far as they’re willing to admit. But when you see
Donald Trump behave in this way, make no sense. Tell lies, inaccuracies look confused and
disheveled. This has to be embarrassing for a Trump supporter,
right? Or are they so cognitively dissonant that they even see this and think, wow, that’s
who I’m voting for for reelection. Let’s look at some clips. Donald Trump was first asked,
what did you know about Sola Moni when you decided to assassinate him? And this is an
important question because we’ve since learned since the assassination, we’ve learned that
Donald Trump essentially knew nothing about, uh, Kaseem Sola Mani, but he was reportedly
talked into the assassination by some of the people around him, even though it had originally
been presented by the Pentagon as the crazy option that they were offering, not expecting
that he would take it. And Donald Trump confirms it. In this first clip, he really knew nothing
about Kaseem Solemani Eric, about what evidence you had the Kasam Salomone
was planning attacks against American targets. What can you tell us about what you knew prior
to ordering the attack? Well, number one, I knew the past. His past was horrible. He
was a terrorist. He was so designated by president Obama, as you know, and he wasn’t even supposed
to be outside of his own country. He was so right there. But that’s in a way the least
of it. We had an attack very recently that he was in charge of where we had people horribly
wounded, one dead. In fact, the number now as of this morning, I believe is two dead,
and that was his. He was traveling with the head of Hezbollah. They weren’t there to discuss
a vacation. They weren’t there to go to a nice resort someplace in Baghdad. They were
there to discuss bad business, and we saved a lot of lives by terminating his life. A
lot of lives of saved and they were planning something, and you’ll go in to be hearing
about it, or at least, uh, various people in Congress are going to be hearing about
it tomorrow. Our secretary of state covered it very well. A little while ago. I saw him,
I saw his news conference. So this is the same razor thin justification
that they’ve been parroting for several days. And you’ll see later in a clip with my Palm
PEO that they’ve already shifted to a different justification for the Kaseem Solemani assassination.
But we’ll get to that. Donald Trump then in the same press avail is asked about his threat
of war crimes. Donald Trump, remember on Twitter threatening to target Iranian cultural heritage
sites. And here’s what he had to say. Also clear up mr president, whether Iranian
cultural sites wouldn’t be on any future targets. Well, as I said yesterday was very interesting.
They are allowed to kill our people. They’re allowed to Mae Mar people. They’re allowed
to blow up everything that we have and there’s nothing to stop them. And we are according
to, uh, various laws, uh, supposed to be very careful with their cultural heritage. And
you know what, if that’s what the law is, I like to obey the law, but think of it, they
kill our people. They blow up our people that we have to be very gentle with their cultural
institutions. But I’m okay with it. It’s okay with me. Oh, these laws, they say we have to be so
careful. We have to be gentle. But importantly, notice that Donald Trump is now backtracking,
saying, okay, we will obey the law. I guess the war crimes have been canceled by Donald
Trump. Good thing. Yesterday I told you that the Pentagon immediately said, yeah, Trump’s
suggesting we target Arabian cultural sites. We wouldn’t do that. The Pentagon immediately
saying, that’s not something that they would do. Then it got really weird as if what we’ve
seen so far isn’t weird enough. Donald Trump was asked about the Greek population in the
United States. Check out what he had to say. Say it with Greece. So, uh, Greece and I and
my people and we have a whole group of people and as you see that brought a lot of great
representatives from Greece that we’ve been dealing with. Uh, we have a tremendous Greek
population, over 3 million people as I understand it. That’s fantastic. I think, I know, I really
feel, I know most of them. I think I know all of them. Come to think of it, but it’s
a great population in the United States. We’re going to be meeting, we’re going to be talking,
we’re going to be negotiating and we’re going to be making a lot of deals. Greece and I love that. Greece, he talks about
Greece and I, the Greek population is tremendous. Now, a quick fact check. There are not 3 million
Greek people in the United States. The number is less than half that 1.4 million Americans
of Greek descent. Now that can be sort of vague, only about 320,000 people in the U
S above age five speak Greek at home as of a few years ago. But never let the facts get
in the way of a good hyperbolic ramble. And then Donald Trump for good measure repeats
the complete and total lie that he was strongly against the Iraq war. Remember, he was not
strongly against the Iraq war. Uh, but here is Donald Trump repeating this yet again. Let’s see. We don’t want to be there forever.
We want to be able to get out. I didn’t want to be there the first place to be honest.
And everybody knows that now. That was what I was a civilian. I said it, but we were there
and they made a decision. And uh, I disagreed with that decision very strongly. But we’re
there now. We’ve done a great job. We’ve gotten rid of the caliphate. 100% of the caliphate
has gone. Now here is Donald Trump saying that he was
in favor of the Iraq war on the Howard stern show in 2002 I’ve played this clip for you
before and it is particularly relevant here. Really don’t know the enemy. You know they’re
skulking around somewhere and you just feel like you’re a sitting duck. But we have an
idea that the enemy is in. A lot of times the politicians don’t want to tell you that.
Are you for invading Iraq? Yeah, I guess so. Uh, you know, I wish it was, I, I wished the
first time it was done correctly. Right, but you still against rebuilding the world trade
center. I’m not against rebuilding very clearly. Not a guy who was against the
Iraq war. So it’s exhausting to keep up with it all. It never makes any sense. It’s a mess.
It’s a worldwide laughing stock. And meanwhile, Donald Trump always seems to be a few talking
points behind on these things because now Donald Trump’s own secretary of state, Mike
Pompeo has come up with a new justification for assassinating Kaseem Solemani. That’s
actually even more incoherent than the one Trump gave. Remember the initial justification
for the assassination of the Iranian Koons leader that started this entire thing, including
two U S military bases being bombed last night was a justification based on the imminence
of an attack plan by Kaseem Solemani, uh, based on what he was doing now and, um, Donald
Trump parroted that during his press avail. But then here is Mike Palm PEO talking about,
Oh no, the justification is attacks that took place sometimes in the past, which is a completely
different explanation. Uh, the opportunity that we thought might
present itself at some point. Uh, and we could see clearly that, uh, not only had Soleimani
done all of the things that we have recounted, right? Hundreds of thousands of massacre in
Syria, uh, enormous destruction of countries like Lebanon and Iraq where they’ve denied
them sovereignty and the ratings have really denied people in those two countries. What
it is they want, right? Sovereignty, independence and freedom is, this is all Solomanis handiwork.
And then we’d watch to see what’s continuing the terror campaign in the region. Uh, we
know what happened, uh, at the end of last year in December. Ultimately leading to the
death of an American, so a shift from it was an imminent threat,
which has been widely debunked because there was no evidence of presented with that too.
This was really more punishment for things that were done in the past. The reason they
can’t get their stories straight is because none of the stories make sense and this was
all framed up as an attempt by Donald Trump to distract from impeachment and to as he
sees it, help him in his reelection campaign in an election that is now just about 10 and
a half months away. This is going to continue getting worse unless an adult can get into
the room and make sure that it doesn’t, it’s not clear that that’s going to happen. We’ll
keep following it and by the time you listen to or watch this clip from may have bombed
Iran, we, we, we just cannot predict what is going to happen next.

What killing of top Iranian general means for nuclear deal and the U.S. in Middle East


JUDY WOODRUFF: Now we return to our top story
in the ongoing tensions with Iran. Nick Schifrin is back with a look at where
this stands three days after the killing of General Soleimani. NICK SCHIFRIN: Judy, we look at how the killing
has impacted the region, and specifically Iran, Iraq and the U.S. And we get two views. Ryan Crocker had an almost-40-year career
as an American diplomat. He served as an ambassador to Iraq, Syria, Kuwait, and Lebanon. He’s
now a diplomat in residence at Princeton University. He was unable to make it to a studio tonight
and joins us on the phone. And Narges Bajoghli is a professor of Middle East studies at the
Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. She’s the author of “Iran Reframed:
Anxieties of Power in the Islamic Republic.” Welcome to you both. Thanks very much. Welcome
to the “NewsHour.” Narges Bajoghli, let me start with you. We heard from the Iranian ambassador to the
U.N. earlier, Judy’s interview, talking about how he’s blaming European partners for not
delivering enough for them to stay in the nuclear deal. Remind us, is this Iran closing the door on
the nuclear deal? NARGES BAJOGHLI, Johns Hopkins University:
Well, I think it’s important. I actually thought that, after the assassination
of Soleimani, that they would potentially completely pull out of the deal. What they
announced on Sunday was interesting, because they haven’t pulled out of the deal. And what they have decided to do is stay within
the framework of the deal and make it so that as, actually, the ambassador said, if other
parties to the deal come back to the table — he means mostly the United States — and
lift sanctions against Iran, that they would be willing to go back to the full framework
of the JCPOA. The reason that he’s blaming the Europeans,
though, in this is that, once the Trump administration began to impose maximum pressure, and especially
the maximum sanctions against Iran, they were hoping that the Europeans would come to their
aid and relieve some of those sanctions. And even though Europe has done the INSTEX
and tried to create a special-purpose vehicle to get around it, it still has not really
taken off. And so I think that that’s part of the reason that they have been blaming
the Europeans for this. NICK SCHIFRIN: Ambassador Crocker, so, a little
bit of ambiguity in how Iran is approaching this moment when it comes to the nuclear deal.
But what are the implications of their further eroding the commitments that they once agreed
to? RYAN CROCKER, Former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq:
I think that if Iran were to pursue its stated desire to pull out of the deal completely
or to start violating all of its terms, they would be making a major strategic mistake. That will alienate the Europeans and many
other countries around the world and serve to isolate Iran, at a time when they have
said they are seeking international support against the United States for the killing
of General Soleimani. So, from an American perspective, if they
want to draw negative attention to them on this important nuclear matter, they’re doing
just the right thing. NICK SCHIFRIN: Narges Bajoghli, in terms of
drawing attention or negative attention, as the ambassador just said, Iran has clearly
been trying to have some positive attention on it accusing the U.S. of an unlawful assassination. And they have been trying to rally their supporters
across the region. What’s the impact of Soleimani’s death on Iran across the region and on Iranian
allies across the region? NARGES BAJOGHLI: Yes, I think the United States
could not have made a bigger mistake as far of the person. The symbol of Soleimani is — what he represented
inside Iran and what he represented to Shia communities across the Middle East, I think,
is something that is extremely important. And that’s one of the reasons, I think, that
other American administrations, when they had the chance, didn’t assassinate Soleimani. But especially since 2013 in the fight against
ISIS, it’s important to remember there was a very large media campaign created in Iran
sort of lionizing Soleimani and his fight against ISIS, because, again, it must be reiterated
that ISIS’ main goal during its fight was to — and one of its main enemies — its main
enemies was the Shia. So Soleimani was seen as this national figure
who stayed above the politics of the country. So, even when Iranians were very much against
the Islamic Republic and against a lot of the policies that the Islamic Republic has
done, he was sort of seen as being above that and protecting the homeland from ISIS coming
in. NICK SCHIFRIN: Ambassador Crocker, Soleimani
did take on ISIS and was seen, of course, as a national figure inside Iran. But the Americans had a very different view
of him, and certainly those American troops. But, also, diplomats who served in Iraq, like
you, had a different view of him, I take it. RYAN CROCKER: The war between Iran and Iraq,
if that’s how we’re styling it, didn’t start with the killing of Qasem Soleimani. It started
ages ago in the early ’80s with his predecessors and their proxies. I was in Lebanon at the time and got to see
up close and personal the bombing of the embassy. I was in it in 1983, again, brought to us
by the — a predecessor of Soleimani and the militia that became Hezbollah. So, General Soleimani, for two decades, has
been heading one of the most lethal operating arms of the state we have ever seen. He has
the blood of hundreds of American troopers in Iraq on his hands. Again, I had to stand at those ramp ceremonies
as we said a final goodbye to dead soldiers. So there’s no question that he was a blood
enemy, if you will. That — all of that said, we have to have
a strategy here. This is a long war. It’s gone on for years. It will go on for years
more at an increased level, I think, after the Soleimani assassination. So the administration has to have a game plan.
And that game plan will need to involve allies, a great deal of strategic patience, the utilization
of some very smart people in the U.S. that know Iran and know how to work with others. None of these are hallmarks of this administration.
So, I worry very much that, while taking a very bad actor off the field is not, in my
view at least, inherently a bad thing, now what? And I’m not seeing any clear answers. NICK SCHIFRIN: Narges Bajoghli, what about
for Iran? Now what? Where do they see this going? And how might they respond? NARGES BAJOGHLI: Yes. Look, a week ago, crowds like we saw the past
two days in Iran were unthinkable, because people were so angry at the state for the
way it had cracked down against protesters in November. What the killing of Soleimani has done is,
it has brought together the population, in addition to not just his assassination, but
also Trump’s tweets about targeting Iranian cultural sites. So, what we do see in this, I think, in the
future? This has been a gift to the survival of the Islamic Republic. I think what we will
see in the future is that the Revolutionary Guard will focus its mission on trying to
get the U.S. forces out of the Middle East. And it now has — and it has rallied forces,
both within Iran and outside of the borders, to do so. NICK SCHIFRIN: And, Ambassador, to you, quickly,
in the time we have left. There have been some fears within administration
officials even that I have talked to, not only fear of unity within Iran, as Narges
Bajoghli just said, but also fear of U.S. troops getting evicted from Iraq because of
this strike. How concerned are you about that? RYAN CROCKER: I think the question of the
U.S. presence in Iraq has a ways to play. The parliamentary resolution was not binding.
And the session was boycotted by most Sunni and Kurdish deputies. There is no unanimity
on the issue of U.S. presence in Iraq, partly because they know how crucial we were to the
eviction of the Islamic State. So, I think it’s time for a pause. Everybody,
take a deep breath and see where we can go with this diplomatically. And I also think
it’s very important for the administration to do what it can to take Iraq out of the
middle. Their president has — the Iraqi president
has… (CROSSTALK) NICK SCHIFRIN: Ambassador, I’m told that — I’m
sorry, Ambassador. I’m sorry to cut you off there, but I’m told we’re out of time. So,
I will just have to thank you there. Ambassador Ryan Crocker, Narges Bajoghli,
thank you very much.

BREAKING: Iran Attacks US Bases, Trump Says “All Is Well!”


War with Iran may be escalating or it may
not be, we don’t know. But what I can tell you is that last night, as I say, they started an impromptu livestream. As we learned that
Iran had attacked two U S bases in Iraq. It was feeling a whole hell of a lot. Like that
evening, uh, in 2003, when George W. Bush was president announcing that we had started
the war with Iraq, Iran has retaliated to Donald Trump’s assassination of the Uranian
Koons leader Kaseem Sola Moni, uh, with missile attacks on two U S bases in Iraq. This includes
the Al Assad base and IR bill, which is another air base. This was very much, uh, starting
to feel like the beginning of the Iran war. Although it’s possible that it won’t happen
and I’ll explain all of the possibilities momentarily. It has not yet escalated in that
way. But as I watched the videos of the missiles last night, seeing the live news coverage
brought me back to the start of the Iraq war. Right now we are not aware of any casualties.
Whether Donald Trump now does or does not react is a material irrelevant foreign policy
decision. But it’s also related to some pretty clever
strategy by Iran. Thanks to Donald Trump being so triggerable and so arrogant and so egoistic.
And I’m going to explain that because that really Trump’s personality could be the one
factor that determines whether this becomes the Iran war or whether this stops here. So
let’s go through this step by step because it’s really important to understand the comings
and goings because this could be an OnRamp to full scale war or it could be an off ramp
from further escalation. So Donald Trump ordered the assassination of the Uranian codes leader.
We’ve already covered this Kaseem Soleimani who was assassinated without congressional
authorization, which Donald Trump previously claimed. Presidents do need to have. Iran
threatened to retaliate, and Donald Trump went to Twitter and said, if you do, we will
escalate. Remember Donald Trump tweeting quote, Iran is talking very boldly about targeting
certain USA assets as revenge for our reading the world of their terrorist leader who had
just killed an American and badly wounded many others. Not to mention all of the people he had killed
over his lifetime, including recently hundreds of Iranian protesters. He was already attacking
our embassy and preparing for additional hits in other locations. Most of this appears to
be untrue. By the way, Iran has been nothing but problems for many years. Let this serve
as a warning that if Iran strikes any Americans or American assets, we have targeted 52 Iranian
sites summit, a very high level and important to Iran and the Iranian culture and those
targets and Iran itself will be hit very fast and very hard. The USA wants no more threats.
So Donald Trump among threatening war crimes, they’re pre committed to further action if
Iran retaliates. So Iran did retaliate. Two strikes yesterday hitting two different military
bases in Iraq, although seemingly without any casualties launching more than a dozen
missiles claiming that every missile hit its target despite not killing anybody. Now, this was deliberate in the sense that
it was calculated. This was a sophisticated move by Iran. If Donald Trump does not want
further escalation, Iran didn’t kill anybody. There are some reports alleging that these
attacks were communicated ahead of time through a proxy to the United States to ensure that
there would be no casualties at these bases so that Iran can get a retaliation on paper,
save face as the case may be without actually killing anybody and without forcing Donald
Trump to escalate further if he chooses not to. And in fact, Iran’s foreign minister Javad
Zarif who also tweets foreign policy said quote Iran took and concluded proportionate
measures in self defense under article 51 of you on charter targeting base from which
cowardly armed attack against our citizens and senior officials were launched. We do
not seek escalation or war, but we’ll defend ourselves against any aggression. This is actually an olive branch to Trump
in the form of a possible off ramp if Trump actually does not want more escalation. This
is a move by Iran that allows Trump to stop here because Iran didn’t kill anybody. This
Iran, uh, this Iranian attack does not force Donald Trump’s hand. If Donald Trump is determined
to escalate, he’s going to do it anyway. Now this is where it gets bizarre. Yesterday in
the midst of all this, Donald Trump tweeted during the livestream that we were doing quote
all is well, missiles launched from Iran at two military bases located in Iraq. Assessment
of casualties and damages taking place. Now, so far so good. We have the most powerful
and well-equipped military anywhere in the world by far. I will be making a statement
tomorrow morning. This goes way too far. This is way too casual. It’s way too upbeat. It’s almost like, Oh cool, we’re going to
have bagels and smoked salmon as well because this is all just so fun and we’re all having
a great time. I was actually wondering whether this was even Donald Trump or someone else
may have taken his phone and tweeted this. All is well, is the phrase of someone who
either is in way over their head is completely intimidated by the more sophisticated strategic
decisions being made by the Uranians, uh, or is simply gaslighting people. My understanding
of Donald Trump’s personality and ego make it very difficult to imagine that he won’t
want to retaliate, but my sense is that there are people around Donald Trump, including
probably secretary of defense, Mark Esper, who do not want an escalation and recognize
that it is not actually necessary here. Now, let’s tail back to the tactics and strategy
piece of all of this. I do believe that if Donald Trump does not do further military
hostilities, that Iran likely will also not do anymore. I I, that seems reasonable. The thing about
Iran is that much differently than Iraq. Iran, cyber warfare capabilities are significant.
Even if a Ron’s military does nothing more in the military realm, the cyber realm becomes
a real possibility and one that Donald Trump’s administration has not taken seriously throughout
the presidency of Donald Trump. Key takeaways. Number one, this does not have to be the start
of world war three, as some are calling it or of the Iran war as others are calling it.
But it depends on Donald Trump. And that’s horrifying the, that the decision about whether
or not the United States enters a major military conflict where they far better equipped opponent
than Iraq. I’m not saying they’re better equipped than the U S they are better equipped than
Iraq. Uh, this, uh, particularly that that decision rests on bogus political grounds.
Um, uh, really primarily to help Donald Trump be reelected and distract from impeachment. It is horrifying that that’s who and what
this depends on. Now, I want to hear from people in my audience, people who watch people
who listen, who want war with Iran. Okay. Yesterday during our livestream we had about
10,000 live viewers and save a few obvious trolls and people who were joking, nobody
says that this is a good idea. So if you support war with Iran, not because you think it’ll
help Trump get reelected, but if you think that there is a worthwhile mission in going
to war with Iran, tell me why you support it, what the targets would be, what the goal
of the of this would be. How would we know if we’ve won, uh, and how long you expect
it to take. Okay. I want to hear from you if you are in that camp. Lastly, this is all
about politics and it’s all about Donald Trump. So let’s talk about that. Does a war with
Iran actually helped Donald Trump? We know that the assassination of Kaseem Solemani
was a political ploy to distract from being an impeached president and to start creating
a pretext to justify his own reelection. There’s a rule of thumb, there’s a conventional wisdom
that Wars are good for incumbent presidents. It allows them to say, let’s not change horses
midstream. It frames them as more presidential than their opponent because not only are they
running for reelection, they’re also managing a war. So historically a military conflicts
have actually been pretty good for the reelection of presidents. But will it work in this case?
It’s not clear to me that in this case it would help Trump, especially because there
seems to be little support for attacking Iran. So I want to hear from you about that as well.
Would a war with Iran actually help Donald Trump in terms of his reelection? Let me know.
I’m on Twitter at D Pacman. Follow me there. Follow the show on Twitter at David Pakman
show and we are going to continue talking about this, um, later on today’s program and
throughout the week as well. I anticipate during live calls on the Friday show, Iran
will continue to be a topic of much discussion. Quick break back after this with much more

Qassem Soleimani and World War III | Iran, Russia and China


Hey there. Donald Trump’s assassination of Qasem Solemani,
a high official of a country we are not at war with is the logical outgrowth of 20 sordid
years of disgusting developments in US foreign policy. Bush’s illegal and idiotic invasion of Iraq
was one step down the path. Another was Obama’s due process free murder
from the air of anybody he designated as an enemy, even US citizens. Most importantly, the US congress’s cowardice
in the face of these actions, and craven renunciation of their constitutional duty to protect us
from war mad kings has brought us to this place. I am honestly not sure what scares me more
at this point. Iran’s reaction to this could be terrible,
and we could be heading for out next multi-trillion dollar war. But Donald Trump could also get away with
it. One of this channel’s most consistent messages
is that the United States is much more powerful than our media and government pretends it
is. This vast power is now wielded by a man who
kills anybody he wants, thinks that the highest use of US power is stealing oil, and issues
pardons to soldierw the US military has arrested for committing war crimes. If we fail to stop this man, there is no longer
any denying it. We are the bad guys. That honestly scares me more than any Iranian
retaliation. But I will tell you something that doesn’t
scare me in 2020: Russia and China. There has been a lot of loose talk about world
war III bandied about this week. It’s even been trending on Twitter. This is an idea you see a lot in the YouTube
comments, and in less responsible places, like the Washington DC think tank community. In the week before the assassination, respectable
sources were panicking about joint naval exercises between Russia, Iran and China. On the day of the assassination I was even
reading an article talking about an emerging Eurasian axis of power arising to confront
the Unoted States. Strangely I can’t find that article anymore. One silver lining to the Soleimani killing
is the fact that the ridiculousness of all this talk has been exposed. You had to look pretty hard to find the Russian
and Chinese reactions to the assassination. It’s mostly just weak calls for calm, and
correct but toothless observations about the damage the US attack does to Iraqi and Iranian
sovereignty. World War Three is not coming any time soon. China or Russia would have to be involved
to make that happen and they have no interest. Iran stands alone, and it will continue to
do so for the next few years. Despite all the Pentagon hype, Russia and
China are powerless in the Middle East. Putin puts up a good show, but whenever he
actually gets in the US’s way in Syria, Russians die in large numbers. That has already happened by the way. The US and Russia both worked hard to make
sure you never heard about it. I am not saying this out of some sick pride
by the way. I am pointing this out because Washington
DC’s lies need to be exposed. Trump, and a whole bunch of other people that
are supposed to be more respectable than him rely on a myth of US weakness. That’s how they justify horrors like what
we did to Libya and Iraq. It’s supposedly scary out there, and unless
we do brutal, insane things like assassinate world leaders, nobody will respect US. The truth is so much sadder. With each passing year of forever war it gets
harder to deny that we are the bad guys. It’s the United States that is pissing away
it’s authority with actions like last Friday’s assassination. Our power is slipping away, but it is doing
so more slowly than the Defense industry and it’s pet institutions claim. Our power will diminish enough to make a third
world war possible but that should take a couple decades. If we continue on the same evil trajectory
we are on now, the world will breath a sigh of relief when our power is finally destroyed. Hopefully it will end with a whimper, like
the Suez crisis rather than with the bang of another world war… Thanks for watching, please subscribe, and
if you want to read about how the last world system fell in a very similar way, you should
read my new book, avoiding the British empire, available now in paperback and ebook form.

Please Conclude The World War Trilogy


It’s been over a century since World War I was released. What was once thought to be several disconnected story lines; ended up intertwining into a really intricate shared universe we had never seen before. The experience was incredible, and revolutionized the industry. People thought that it could not be topped. They called it The War to End All Wars. They even called it the Great War, because it was so good. After the war was over, everyone was so sad that they fell into a depression for a very long time. Then, to the surprise of everybody; World War II came out and upped the stakes. Avoiding the pitfalls of most sequels, World War II kept what made the original great, while adding in several new features that kept things interesting. Several familiar faces returned with added spins on their character. World War II blew everybody away, especially the Japanese! It was a massive hit for its time and is ubiquitous today. But since then fans have been wondering: “When are we going to get a conclusion to this trilogy?” At the end of World War II, World War III promised to up the stakes with gritty re-imagined characters, and the entire world on the line. There is no doubt that there is a huge market for the conclusion of this trilogy with an audience of billions and sales easily in the trillions. So the question everyone’s asking is: “Why not complete the trilogy?” Since 1945 all we’ve gotten is lackluster spin-offs that hint that a third edition might be in the works. but let’s face it, the Vietnam War was not the smash hit that it was intended to be. The rise of mass shootings has shown that there is a dedicated fan community willing to crowdfund this if it needs to happen. Now, some people say it’s because once likable characters just aren’t what they used to be. The once patriotic Americans are now overweight, depressed, and wondering if they should even wage more Wars. The once proud and powerful communists are now effeminate numbers of the queer community. And modern-day Neo-Nazis are, put lightly, degenerate. And also probably members of the queer community who just haven’t sorted some things out within themselves yet. But fear not super-fans, with new rises in populism, militaristic and economic tensions growing, and the depletion of Natural Resources, the writers could be setting the stage for the third edition of the trilogy! Soon people across the globe will have a new experience they can sink their lives into. We can only hope. Guys only want one thing and it’s fucking disgusting It’s to die in a war. (die in a war) *random do do do’s with “die in a war”* I wanna die in a war, I wanna die in a war. This isn’t a joke I need something to do.

What’s the Worst Case Trump Scenario in Iran?


Let’s go to the phones for the first time
in 2020 at six one, seven, eight three zero 47 50. See what’s on people’s minds. Let’s go first to our caller from the 61 five
area code color from six one five. Uh, what’s your name? Where are you calling from? What’s on your mind today? Hi David. My name is Austin. I’m a big payday show. I was just wondering with this whole, um,
no, it wasn’t us doing what he did last night. What’s the worst case scenario? Like are we expecting anything to come from
this stock’s going to go up, I don’t know. Austin, your, your connection is, uh, the
worst of 2020 so far. I mean, of course this is only the first phone
call we’ve taken, but listen, I, I gathered that you’re asking about what’s the worst
case scenario based on Trump’s unauthorized and possibly illegal assassination of the
Uranian leader. Is that right? Yeah, that’s, that’s right. I’m sorry about the connection. That’s okay. Listen, the worst case scenario is we get
into the most disastrous war of my lifetime, which as I said earlier in the show that says
a lot, given that we’ve had Iraq and we’ve had Afghanistan, and it may all be because
Donald Trump thinks it may help him get elected in 2020. And you know, I don’t know if you’ve seen
some of the, that Donald Trump sent years ago about Barack Obama and Iran saying Obama
is going to bomb Iran to try to get reelected. And you know, it, it’s unbelievable that this
is where we are. But the worst case scenario is really bad. Yeah, that’s what I thought. All for political gain. It’s pretty disgusting if you think about
it. Oh, it’s, it’s incredible. And you know, the, the saddest part about
it is it often works, you know, I mean, when you look at George w Bush’s reelection in
2004 it came down to, I think it was about 140,000 votes in Ohio, if I recall correctly. And a lot of his campaign was based on, you
don’t want to change horses midstream. We’re in the middle of this Iraq thing, and
when you’re talking about, you know, Trump likely losing the popular vote again in 2020
but being able to eke out a win electorally, something like a contingent of people who,
who think we’re in the middle of this thing, let’s let him finish it out. It could actually win the election for him. That’s the sickest part of it. Yeah. Yeah. Well, thanks for answering my question. All right. I appreciate it. Hope to hear from you again. Looks like your connection got much better
there towards the end of the call, which we love.