Speaker 1: And hello, how are you welcome to the Big Podcast.
It is Wednesday, the fifteenth day of April, Year of
Our Lord, twenty twenty six. My name is Tom Sullivan,
yep April fifteenth, and I don't know it used to
be I don't know April fifteenth. It used to be
more of an occasion. It's tax day. Is the deadline
for filing your twenty twenty five taxes. But that doesn't
mean you have I mean if you if you don't
file or don't file an extension. Extensions are free. If
you don't file either of those, you can get a
penalty which is pretty expensive. That is for failure to file,
and that has an assessment every single month. I believe
I'm doing this for memory, so I may be out
of touch with it, but it was five percent a
month up to twenty five percent of your taxes. It's
the penalty. So there's a penalty for failure to file
or for being late to file, and then the other
penalty is for failure to pay. So even if you
file an extension, which is free, and I know you
haven't done your taxes because otherwise you wouldn't be filing
an extension. But if So how you're supposed to know
if you owe anything, Well, IRS thinks that you're good
at guessing, and that's kind of what you've got to
do is do your best, but try to figure out
what it is regarding how much you think you're going
to owe and and pay it today. And if you
if you don't pay it today, then there's interest penalties,
So failure to file and failure to pay at the
penalty and interest. So it's yeah, I know, you know,
it wouldn't it wouldn't be so bad if well, I'm
just exaggerated, if if they've spent our money more wisely.
I mean, we can disagree about how they're going to
spend our money, but seriously, they're just out of control
with their spending. I mean, this is you know again,
we're we are in. It doesn't matter Republican or Democrat,
they're all big spenders. So anyway, happy tax day to you.
Go ahead, yeah, try to find a way to relax.
I've got oh, I got a phone call from Eric
that I got to play for you later. He's all
all depressed about his taxes. But meantime, what do we
got today? We've got course the update on the blockade,
and we've got the update on Eric Swallwell and some
observations about the TPUSA gathering at the University of Georgia
last time. So let's get started as far as the
the war effort goes, I still, for the life of me,
do not understand why we are negotiating with the with
these people that are from the same regime. We don't
have a regime change at all, So why are we
negotiating with these people that you can't trust. They lie
like a sieve, they always have. So Brett mcdirk, who
I think always has a good level head on his
shoulders about all this because he's got great experience in
dealing with the Middle East and with the wrong has
this to say.
Speaker 2: Andison I would never say I'm optimistic on anything regarding
the Iran file. I am hearing from people in the
region from that, the senses we're winding our way to
another round of talks, to a diplomatic path and we'll
see that is definitely the sense that's out there. There's
a lot of diplomatic work behind the scenes from mediators.
The Chinese are leaning on the Iranians, I'm told who
knows for what's really happening, but I think we are
likely to see a second round of talks. But I'm
watching two indicators and I think, you know, separate the
signal from the noise and what's being said from day
to day. Number One is the ceasefire holding right now? Yes,
I think that's very good. Number Two, is this blockade
of shipping from Iranian ports? Is that working? Sencom is
very confident that it is. Some of the ship tracker
data suggests somemmer squirting through.
Speaker 3: We'll have to see.
Speaker 2: But then the third thing, are is Iran going to
contest that or not? So right now they're not, But
if they do, then we're back into a conflict phase.
So let me just kind of back up. Right now,
it looks like the diplomatic path is getting some traction,
the ceasefire is holding, that's good, and all eyes still
in the straight of hormose. Is the US blockade working
keeping that traffic away from the Iranian ports? That's going
to really bite the Iranians. And the second part of
that mission though for Sentcom, is to open the international
passages to the Strait to give confidence to shippers to
pass through. And that still seems to be not happening.
So I'm keep an eye on that, keep an eye
on the straight up. Our moose is a ceasefire holding,
and do we have this second round of talks before
the ceasefire expires next week.
Speaker 1: As we wrapped up the podcast yesterday, there was a
rumor about it wasn't rumored. The President came out and said, yeah,
we may have talked within the next couple of days.
That was yesterday Tuesday, so they were thinking by Thursday.
And now I don't know. He says stuff like that.
He says he lives in a world that he wishes
the world was, and the reality is it doesn't look
Somebody said, I mean we may have it here, said
it takes twenty hours to fly there. You're not going
to get talked within the next couple of days. But
it would seem to me like coming back a week later,
all the way to Pakistan. Come on, let's get some
real meat on the table by the underlings and come
up with an agreement, if there is one. But I
still I think we should continue the military effort and
crush the regime, crush the leaders of that country, and
then go in and supervise it for a year. Or
two and let the people choose their own leaders. Another
way of looking at this is Scott Anderson, who is
a prolific author who has written extensively about Iran. He's
not so optimistic. I'm not very optimistic. I think there's
two kind of core questions here. Who benefits from dragging
the process out absolutely on the side of the ir onions.
And the second is which side can endure the most
suffer and most pain. And I think clearly the Ironience
have proven that as well. I you know, this idea
that the blockade so ships.
Speaker 4: Can't come up, and this is a country that's been
you know, had tens of thousands of bombs dropped on
it the last month. The idea that it's going to somehow,
you know, kneel down because of the naval blockade, I
think is silly. The economy was already in a shambles.
That's what led to the to the demonstrations and the
killings in January. I think that I think that the regime.
I think if you go back, and I think it's
important to look at what happened in January that the regime.
There was demonstrations against the regime for ten days that
were largely peaceful. They were mistasticizing the size. Finally the
government reached a point where it thought it was going
to go down, so they killed thirty to forty thousand
people in one weekend. They see their back against the wall,
and as as Miss Sherman said, they need to feel
like they're getting something out of any sort of negotiated settlement.
They don't have much to give because they could be
overthrown by the people and they don't you know, they'd be.
Speaker 1: Slaughter So these are the people that were negotiating with really.
Brett McGirk also responds to what s good Anderson was.
Speaker 2: Saying, SAMs, I largely agree with the thrust of what
Scott's saying. I also have to we have to have
some humility. We really don't know what's happening inside Iran.
And if you would if we were on this two
weeks ago and someone had said we are going to
see a ceasefire, and then the highest level talks between
Iran and the United States since the nineteen seventy nine revolution,
with Gotliboff meeting face to face with the Vice President
and with the IRGC there and the entire team from
are on there I would have said that's highly unlikely
to happen, because I did not think the first move
of whoever rises to the leadership ranks in Tehran after
this conflict would reach out to the Great Satan. The
one thing that going back to home Andy they said
you cannot do. They really just shattered a taboo. So
it's fairly extraordinary that that happened, and that these talks
are still ongoing.
Speaker 5: So I don't know.
Speaker 2: I agree it'll take. So you can read it two ways.
You could say they feel so strong that they're coming
to you know, show that we have the strength and
we're gonna we're finally going to meet with you face
to face at the most senior level we've never done
it before. Or they're in some trouble and they actually
they know it and we are offering significant sanctions relie
because I understand that, which is something they want, uh
and to to you know, they can do a violent crackdown,
but they also want to I think, alleviate some of
the economic strain in their population. So we have some
cards to play.
Speaker 1: I don't know General Keith Kellogg, he's been around, been
around this war business for a long long time and
he and I are on the same page.
Speaker 6: I'm already the next step. What I mean by the
next step I go to blockade, and we're rather as
we're were going to go next to the blockade has
to be discontinued or continued, and you add something onto it,
which means actually going into not into the middle of Iran,
but taking our carg Island and Rock Island and play
like that with our marines. Eighty second aary borders somebody
like that. You know, I would tell the Iranians, looked,
if there's a ship, we put them through there and
a mind goes off, You're done, We're done with this,
We're fed up with you or finished off. The concern
I've got is we're negotiating still with an autocratic, theocratic
government when you know the people, like their foreign minister
are Rachi. These are hardcore revolutionary guards and it's the
old the younger crew that's come on board. They're still there.
They've still had been indoctrinated for over forty plus years
of hating America and that hasn't changed. So you're dealing
with maybe some regime adjustments, but not regime change out there.
And I think we need to take that into consideration,
and part of that considerations we just said, we're tired
of you guys, We're done with it. We're going to
change the dynamics of the Middle East for the next
thirty or forty years. We can sweep the Gulf right
now with the mind sweepers coming in with his Forden
in Japan, bring them down the LCS the destroyers as
was shown, which Bill showed in a great animation there.
But there's always a chance for one happening. You know.
In the army, you've got to when you delay a minefield,
you have to record that minefield, when you do with
the navy. In the sea, we don't know what's out there,
and I bet you they're not disciplined enough to figure
out where those minds are. So we don't know. And
they're random one or two minds out there. Yep, probably
it's going to happen.
Speaker 7: Now.
Speaker 1: He's with me on the idea that you're dealing with
a regime that are they're brutal killers, liars, cheaters. Walt
Street Journal yesterday had a big editorial about the fact
that this group that's leading the negotiations for the Iranians
are more hardliner than the previous group that we killed.
So I think we're wasting our time. Just finish the
military campaign and finish their their leadership and move on.
It's confusing, though, because the President, like I said, he
lives in a world that he wishes was out there.
He kind of in a dream world about things, and
it's all very part of his you know, positive thinking
about this is what I see, this is what I imagine,
and if I keep seeing and imagining, it will come true.
But he's been I'll play a handful of recent audio
clips of the president. He was talking this morning with
Maria Bartiromo, and there's a bunch of comments about how
we've already won. No, we haven't. We still have more
work to do.
Speaker 4: Do you believe the price of oil and gas will
be lower before the midterm elections?
Speaker 8: I hope so, I mean, I think, Shelley, it could
be all the same or maybe a little bit higher,
but it should be around the same. I think this
won't be that much longer.
Speaker 1: It's we're already seven weeks into this, so I don't
know how much longer means, and oil prices may be
the same or maybe even higher come election day. Wow,
and you thought maybe you could hold on. He's predicting
that the gas prices will stay where they are, or
possibly higher.
Speaker 7: I had a divert because if I didn't do that
right now, you would have a ran with a nuclear weapon.
And if they had a nuclear weapon, you would be
calling everybody over there, sir, and you don't want to
do that.
Speaker 1: Well, you keep saying, wa was Is this war over?
Speaker 7: I think it's close to ovie. I mean I view
it as very close to over. You know what, if
I pulled up stakes right now, it would take them
twenty years to rebuild that country. And we're not finished.
We'll see what happens. I think they want to make
a deal very badly.
Speaker 1: It counds to me like we want to make a
deal very badly. But that's kind of a It keeps
predicting that it's almost over. We've won already, and there's
still a lot of work to do. Kareem Sanjapour is
with the Carnegie Institute.
Speaker 3: For the first time since this war began six weeks ago.
I think there is actually momentum towards some kind of
a resolution. Now, it's not going to be the comprehensive
resolution that President Trump hopeful. I think they're going to
more narrowly focus on the nuclear issue. And what I'm
cincate is that the most consequential debate and negotiation may
not be between America and Iran, but within the Iranian side,
between those who say the country is in such dire
economic straits that it needs to do a deal and
those that want to continue with revolutionary defiance. You have
a supremely rietl Haamany who has been ruling for thirty
seven years, and suddenly he's killed. That opens up an
enormous power vacuum, and so right now people are jocking
for power. And I do think the dividing line are
between those who say we need to continue forward with
what I call vision nineteen seventy nine, the vision of
the nineteen seventy nine revolution, death to America, death to Israel,
versus those who say, listen, we're not going to survive
under so this level of economic duress. We need to
do a deal with the United States. And the person
that is emerging is the Speaker of Parliament, Mohammed Barb Kaliboff,
who spent twenty hours with Vice President. That's the most
senior US level contacts with Iran since nineteen seventy nine.
Speaker 1: And by some descriptions, he's one of those that are
more hardline than what they had before over there, which
was pretty bad. Admiral Pazzi Miller asked about the whole
question of the blockade, which does seem to be working.
Speaker 9: Well, it's been effective and I think having the impact
that we expected that it would, which has taken away
the regime's opportunity to make money. So, as Kareem just
talked about, Iran was in desperate economic straits before the
conflict started, this certainly isn't going to help that, and
it becomes very difficult for the regime to continue to
prosecute the war, to continue to oppress its people if
it doesn't have an income source to be able to
do it work. I think we really learned two different
things from this activity by the regime. One is that,
as everyone expected, we've been enormously effective and successful in
the strikes that have been conducted thus far in the conflict.
And so if the idea was to reduce the number
of ballistic missiles Iran had available to it, both by
destroying the missile storage sites and by destroying launchers. We've
had good success in that regard. At the same time,
we also learn that there's a resiliency to this regime
and we've known this. I think we knew it going
into it. But they're not going to give up easily,
and so if they have to dig through the rubble
to find launchers and to be able to cobble together systems,
they're going to try to try to do that. And
so some of those targets, if this war goes on
much longer, are going to have to be revisited.
Speaker 1: So the blockade is working. It's crimping them economically. They're
already in bad economic shape, and now they're digging up
some of the areas where we bomb some of their
missile launchers. John Bolton says, great, let them dig them
up so we can shoot them in the pizzas.
Speaker 10: Again, well, not in a way that's satisfactory to the
United States. I do think Trump has wanted out of
this for quite some time. It's palpable and the way
he discusses it, he just can't figure out how to
do it in a way that he can declare victory
with a straight face. I don't think in the near
term you can declare victory until we have militarily cleared
the Strait of Hormuz such that Gulf Arab oil can
get out. I think it's the right thing to do
to blockade ships going to and from Iran. But I
think what's critical to demonstrate that Iran is not the
hedgehm on in the Gulf is that we have to
make it safe for the other oil producers to get
their oil out, which will have a material impact, I
think on the global economy, and while shutting Iran's exports
down certainly have a material effect on their economy too.
Speaker 6: Well.
Speaker 1: About the missile launchers that they're digging up, it just
show that they are resilient and they're not going to
give up easily. But again Bolton says, let them do it.
Speaker 10: Well, I think that's what they're certainly trying to do.
I mean, we've got intelligence reports that indicate that the
administration's claims of success, particularly against missile launchers, may have
been overly optimistic. The silver lining here is let them
dig them out, let them bring them out. I assume
we're going to be watching all these very carefully. As
they bring them out, we destroy them, then we can
close the tunnels. Again, this is a question that requires
resolve on the part of the president. Now, whether he
thought about that in advance or not is highly unclear,
but it's a mistake at this point to look for
an easy way out. I think the government of Iran
has been badly damaged. I don't buy the argument that
the regime is still intact, is still functioning. I think
it's clearly been sent back. President Pozeshkian was quoted in
the press yes today is saying it would take twelve
years to get Iran's economy back to the point where
it was on February the twenty eighth, And where it
was on February the twenty eighth was in the cellar.
So we've had enormous impact and this is not the
time to pull back again.
Speaker 1: I fully agree. This is not that we're right on
the precipice of victory, and don't stop now, don't even
bother with negotiations now, just go ahead and wipe out
the leadership and move on. One other guy who keeps
a close eye on everything in Iran, and that is
Barack revealed with Axios.
Speaker 5: Trump Guniztation knows that if it wants a deal with Iran,
there will have to be some sort of a regional component,
and the trumpt guniztation wants any ceased firing Lebanon not
to be connected to an Iranian dictation or demand or pressure,
but to be something that is a result of direct
Israeli Lebanese negotiations. So I think the Trump nisation's interest
is to have this sea is fire even before it
has any kind of deal with Iran. That's number one.
Number two for now. A meeting, a second meeting between
Vice President Vance and the US negotiation team and Speaker
of Iranian Parliament Kalibaf and his negotiation team hasn't been
scheduled yet, it could be scheduled. I think when Trump
said this morning that it might happen in the next
two days, I think it's clear that it's not going
to happen in the next days. One day is over
and it's a twenty hour flight to Pakistan, so doesn't
seem to me that anything will happen in the next
twenty four hours. But we have until April twenty first
to do another round of negotiations and try to get
a deal. I'm not sure it's enough time. But I
also don't get the impression that President Trump has a
lot of appetite to extend the Seas final.
Speaker 1: And what we're hearing this afternoon is that he doesn't
want to extend the ceasefire. He's putting pressure on to
try to come to some sort of fruition before April
twenty first. That by the way, let me look at
my calendar. I think it's next, yes, next Tuesday, so
it's coming up quickly, and I wouldn't be a bit
surprised if they don't kick the can down the road
and move the ceasefire beyond. But right now it's they're
still holding on for the ceasefire to end April twenty first,
which is Tuesday. Now. In the meantime, if the blockade
is holding, give it a chance, give it a chance
to If they're losing, I've seen all the way from
hundreds of millions to billions a day that Iran is
losing because of the blockade, well then let's keep it
going until they squeal. Let's until somebody yells uncle, let's
go ahead and keep the blockade going. And and and meantime,
you could do that while the ceasefire is is in effect,
but even when the ceasefire is no longer in effect.
I don't know why we stopped the ceasefire to talk,
but we did so again. Mark your calendars for next Tuesday.
My bet is that they will push the ceasefire past
that because they won't have an agreement by that time. Meantime,
JD Vance found himself in a little bit of a pickle,
you know. So they said, okay, jd you go talk
to the Iranians and come up with a deal. And
he came back from Pakistan did not have a deal.
And he also went to Hungary to a campaign for Orbon,
who's been the head of Hungary for sixteen years. It
is during Orbond's leadership, and a lot of people are going, well,
he's the big conservative guy, He's like Trump and everything else.
That doesn't matter. The point is is that of all
the European Union nations, Hungary is by far the porous.
It is broke so under Orbon's leadership, the people are
living in a country with a very poor economy and
they're also financially being pressured. So I get why people
threw Orbon out, but did why did JD Vance go
to I don't know, interfere in Hungary's elections. We yell
about other countries interfering in our elections. Why did they
send jd Vance to Hungary to campaign for Orbon who
has been way behind in the polls for a long
long time, so they keep setting him up for all
these these things that turn out not to be winners.
And now he went last night to the University of
Georgia TPUSA, Turning Point USA had a big event there
last night and they had it at a big auditorium
at the University of Georgia and the place was mostly empty.
There was a very small group of people there. And
not only did Jade Vance have to basically sing and
dance to the crowd that was there, it was very
very small. But in addition to that, Erica Kirk, the
widow of Charlie Kirk, she did not show up, and
they said she did not show up because of the
fact that there were threats that had been made against her.
Here's Andrew Colvert, who is kind of the guy operating TPUSA.
Speaker 11: Yeah, I mean it was a really unfortunate experience for
me too, just to have to watch that very difficult
decision get made, which I think is the first time
that we've ever had to make that decision in Turning
Point history. But everything that happened with Charlie, obviously his assassination,
were still, you know, grieving that, and you saw what
happened with Savanna Hernandez, one of our TPOSA frontlines reporters
in Minneapolis. And to see the security team, you know,
tell us we cannot guarantee your safety, we recommend that
you don't do this was a really chilling moment for
all of us to kind of have to internalize and
experience and realize that Erica Kirk is you know, her
children are one parent away from being orphans, and sometimes
you just have to say, listen, right now, what's most
important is your safety, is your security and your children,
your family. Let your team handle this, Let us do
what we can do. And so, you know, I obviously
was horrified at the reason why, but I was honored
to stand in and pinch Hint for Erica last night,
and I was grateful for the Vice president that we
didn't have to ultimately cancel the entire event. He was
willing to do it with me, and it was very gracious.
The problem they have is Erica Kirk is going to
be a lightning rod. If you want to go have
a big event in stadiums, there's always going to be
a security risk. So if there's always going to be
a security risk, is she ever going to go to
any of these events ever again? And the fact that
she bailed on last night? Is that why the crowd
was so small.
Speaker 1: Here's JD. Evans talking about it. I love Erica and
I know that she did get some threats.
Speaker 11: I was a little worried that we were going to
have to cancel the event because Erica was not going
to come, and she was very worried about it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but what's ironic is the Vice President of the
United States went, and obviously the Secret Service felt comfortable
enough to have him go. So the whole thing, I listen,
I'm my observation is is that without Charlie Kirk, TPUSA
is not going to thrive like it was when he
was around. When he was alive, it was his thing,
his program, his personality, his voice that made that whole
thing go. So as much as I feel bad about
Erica and the family and the staff, I think their
months or years are are very very limited if she
if she can't go to these events, then this thing's
going to die off faster than I thought. And back
back to JD Vance for a moment. He has converted
to Catholicism a few years ago, and he has a
book coming out very soon about his conversion to Catholicism.
In the middle of day four of the President griping
about the Pope, and the Pope's off in Africa doing
some work in Africa with people in that country, he
was in Algier. In any case, what Jdi Vance said
was that the Pope should be careful when talking about theology.
And I'm thinking, man, I'm certainly not in the position
to tell the Pope about what to say regarding theology.
The Pope is kind of the number one head voice
of the theological reasons behind the Catholic Church. And so
if Jedie Vance thinks that he's converted to Catholicism, he
might have skipped over the part about how important the
Pope's words are when it comes to things like theology.
So I mean, it's just, I mean, it's a long
time between twenty twenty eight, but already people are going, man,
the Catholic vote is looking and going, what you're lecturing
the Pope about how to speak about theology, and the
President is lecturing the Pope every day about something regarding
He doesn't like the fact that the Pope is for peace,
and he's making it very clear he's not for war.
So that battle goes on, and it's not one to pick.
You just don't as a politician. You just don't want
to pick a fight with the Pope. The Pope is
not a politician, and I think the President thinks he is.
On One of the other big stories this week, obviously,
is Eric Walwell, and that story has died down very
much today because yesterday another woman came out and we
all had the tape of her interview. But the whole
business about women in the workplace and the me too generation,
I've seen a number of women in the media having
panel discussions with other women about Eric Walwell and about
men in the workplace and about me too. And I
find it interesting. But men have been chasing women around
since the caveman days. But today we have rules and
we have laws that, especially in the workplace, on what
you can and cannot do. But some men I don't
care if these women go I don't understand. I don't
understand it either. But there are some men that just
don't care, and they are going to try to pursue
their sexual desires one way or the other. They don't
care what the rules say. Rina Shaw is a young
political strategist, commentator Republican. Her job is to go out
and try and reach out to various groups that are
not traditionally Republican. And she was asked about this whole
business about political men going after women.
Speaker 12: I've been vocal about real change like this because I've
lived this culture for nearly two decades on Capitol Hill.
I started off in a junior role and got to
the highest senior, most staff rules, and two personal offices
of Republican members of Congress. And I can tell you
just flat out no, no, no. Eric Stalwell's attorney tonight
is not representing him well. She is painting this as
some kind of partisan takedown and as people who do
not want to do process. This is not a partisan takedown.
Women with no political ties and deep insiders alike are
describing the same experiences here. And I personally here am
speaking from pattern recognition, not from the place of believe
all women. But you asked me about what I think
about Swalwell, and I think what no one is really
saying here is that Eric Swalwell is a sex addict.
He knew what he was doing, but he didn't care.
He became a party darling very early. I remember his predecessor,
former Congressman Stark, So I was there a long time
and I watched it all. And many of us have
long known about his extramarital endeavors and the unsolicited nudes.
But what happened is that it crossed a much darker
line when a former staffer alleged that he raped her
while she was too intoxicated to consent. So let's get
this clear. When a member propositions or get sexually involved
with a subordinate like a staffer or an intern, that
is a clear Title seven violation illegal workplace harassment, because
the power dynamic is completely skewed. Your livelihood depends on
that boss, and people are not realizing that back when
I was there at least, and I don't think it's changed.
Many of these personal offices, the vast majority have something
called at will employment. If something happens, you're getting booted,
not the member of Congress.
Speaker 1: And that's been going on for as long as I
can remember in offices as well, not Congress, but just
in business offices. I've seen it. You've seen it, and
I think every woman out there can testify to the
fact that they had not only seen it, but also
maybe experienced that kind of pressure that's going on. So
Swilwell has got lawyers jumping up and down trying to
protect him, but he's the investigations are underway. So I'm
sure when the investigation at the DA in Manhattan and
also the La County Sheriff's Department will get more information
on him, then you want to get some phone calls
in today. Let's start on this tax day with our
buddy Eric. He's all depressed because he's doing his taxes.
Speaker 13: Good evening in town. This is me, Eric, How are you. Oh,
I'm so depressed. Gosh, I gotta finish my taxes and
I'm just barely making it. I mean, I'm so like,
just just it's just hard when you're depressed. You know,
it's just hard to concentrate. You stop doing and there's
something it's just you know, hard to focus. But anyway,
I'm doing my best. I imported all the data and
I all the forums and I entered data. I didn't
check it, but it's all in there. I just need
to run, you know, But anyway, I'll finish it some how, hopefully.
Speaker 1: My poor guy, he's not Eric, You're not a low
There's a lot of people that are depressed as they're
filling out their tax forms. And here's a guy who
I didn't think there was any confusion about it, but
there might be. He's worried about the fact that people
don't know that the Strait of Horror Moves is in
international waterways.
Speaker 8: Oh ho, my name is sl better known as Sea Lawyer.
Subject line the Straits of her Moos. To my knowledge,
you and no one else is reporting that the Straits
of her Moose is under the law of the Seat,
the International Maritimes law through the UN Security Council. It's
something to that effect. In other words, people probably think,
or I did, that Iran owned a thing because it's
mining as in the way it's carrying on. Iran doesn't
own it. I think to you people, how to research
it and give the history of the Straits of her Moves,
and that it is supposedly supposed to be shared by
many many countries. Your I'd say regular listener doesn't realize this,
and uh, to my knowledge, no one stating that fact.
They're just talking about this. Ain't the fact that the
Iranians have killed so many civilians in the last months
for demonstrating. But they're not saying who is in charge
of the Straits of her Moose or about any international
law of it.
Speaker 1: Well, he maybe right. I just assumed that most people
knew that the Strait of her Moves was international waterways.
But for those of you who did not know that,
it does not belong to any country. It's the international waterways.
That's why we are upset about them blockading it. So
what are we doing. We're blockading it so that they
can't get any money from all the oil the good
that ships through there. Let's see, here's somebody who is
I I just going to take a wild guess. I
don't think he likes President Trump.
Speaker 14: Yeah, I just want to say, you guys talk so
much about Solwell and what he did and say nothing
about Donald Trump. Talk about voter don't know whether it's
Democratic or Republican voter FORUD and I bet you as
a Republican and the things that he's doing is putting
out here is just absolutely ridiculous. The only people that's
buying it is hagcore Republicans and very dumb people. The
rest of us know it's just Trump times too.
Speaker 1: I think I was right. I don't think he likes
President Trump, but he did win the election. More people
voted for him than Commelon. But no, you can disagree
with him, that's fine. I think we did talk extensively
about all of his warts and the fact that he's
had a reputation as a playboy from his days and
developer of New York City, and all the women that
have accused him of things. I think those have been
pretty well reported. They were more than reported. They were
extensively talked about. So I know you want to keep
that going. But right now, Eric Swalwell seems to have
grabbed the spotlight on all of that. As far as
Wall Street goes, it turned out to be not much.
We started positive with the Dow today, but that did
last long. We finished with the Dow down seventy two
to That sounds pretty tame compared to what we've been
through lately. The Dow at forty eight four sixty three,
the S and P up fifty five, the Nasdac continues
its winning way. It's on a long streak. I think
this is day eleven, up three hundred and seventy six.
The price of gold fell thirty six dollars down to
four thousand and eight fourteen, and oil again it stayed
pretty close to home. Up, a little down, a little
finished up ten cents to ninety one dollars and some change.
That's it for today. We will take a short break
and be back again tomorrow, and I certainly hoped to
see you then.