Speaker 1: Good morning from South Dakota. Welcome back Dragon. I don't
Speaker 1: know if Michael told you, but I was on vacation
Speaker 1: last week. Also, everyone, have a great day.
Speaker 2: You're you're retired, aren't you. Aren't you always on vacation?
Speaker 2: I mean, congratulations. If you were on vacation, I hope
Speaker 2: you enjoyed it. But so every day.
Speaker 3: My complain about our friend over there in the bad
Speaker 3: Lands is that when he left for vacation, every day
Speaker 3: we got a new talk back from well, now I'm
Speaker 3: in you know, Amarillo, and now I'm in Oklahoma City
Speaker 3: or Tulsa, and now I'm in I don't know, Nashville
Speaker 3: or where the hell it was, and then went to silent,
Speaker 3: and then all of a sudden, I was like, I'm
Speaker 3: back home. Hmm, what were you doing in the meantime?
Speaker 2: Secret missions?
Speaker 1: Secret mission?
Speaker 3: Yeah, which is happened to coincide with some of the
Speaker 3: planning for this very true, you know, kind of wonder
Speaker 3: kind of when what's going on? A quick recap of yesterday.
Speaker 3: So the Vice President JD. Vans appeared on both Meet
Speaker 3: the Press and this Week Well George Stepanah love love Us.
Speaker 3: He embodied the deliberate calm of a man who knows
Speaker 3: that the world just shifted in America's favor. There's a
Speaker 3: recalibration going on ever since news, ever since. You know,
Speaker 3: it was funny because Saturday evening or frid sorry, Friday evening. Uh,
Speaker 3: I'm kind of like, uh, I want to I want
Speaker 3: to stay up and you know, because you know I
Speaker 3: always go to Betterarly, I want to know what Trump says.
Speaker 3: Three minutes and thirty five seconds. Bam bam, Thank you
Speaker 3: ma'am Internet, Here's what we did. Good night, God bless America.
Speaker 3: Van emphasized that the strike was not a prelude to war,
Speaker 3: but the opposite, that it was a calculated disruption of
Speaker 3: a regime's most dangerous ambitions. He told Kristen Welker, I'll
Speaker 3: meet the press that we are not at war with Iran.
Speaker 3: We destroyed the Iranian nuclear program, and we did it
Speaker 3: without endangering the lives of American pilots.
Speaker 1: Now that's not bluster.
Speaker 3: Again, that's the strategic precision that I'm so impressed with
Speaker 3: the strikes. Seven B two stealth bombers operating under this
Speaker 3: veil of operational silence so complete that not even the
Speaker 3: seasoned analysts knew they left Missouri until after they had
Speaker 3: reached Guam. Those that were going westward to be a decoy,
Speaker 3: the target Ferdeaux Natans Isfahan. Those are the three crown
Speaker 3: jewels of Ram's weapons program, all you know, embedded deep
Speaker 3: within those mountains, and yet we hit them with surgical
Speaker 3: accuracy using the GBU fifty seven AB massive ordnance penetrators,
Speaker 3: the MOPS.
Speaker 1: You know, I find it kind of interesting.
Speaker 3: We've got all this new language and I hear people
Speaker 3: talking all the time. It was kind of funny because
Speaker 3: I think maybe it was Saturday I use the term
Speaker 3: bunker buster, and or maybe as I mean way it
Speaker 3: was on the program, it was on X and only
Speaker 3: people that don't know really what they are refer to
Speaker 3: them as bunker busters. Well, you can find all sorts
Speaker 3: of military people that refer to them as bunker busters.
Speaker 3: But now we know they're GBU fifty seven A and
Speaker 3: B also mops, massive ordnance penetrators insert sexual joke. There
Speaker 3: no civilian casualties, no boots on the ground, no room
Speaker 3: for Tehran to pretend that it was caught unaware. Vance
Speaker 3: put it very plainly and simply, Iran had been playing
Speaker 3: for time. They were hoping to bluff delay. They just
Speaker 3: simply wanted to outlast another administration. But the Trump administration
Speaker 3: Trump two point zero is not interested at all in
Speaker 3: performative art diplomacy. Vance said, we didn't blow up the diplomacy.
Speaker 3: The diplomacy was never given a real chance by the Iranians.
Speaker 3: That is a factually true statement. Steve Whitcoff has been
Speaker 3: over in Cutter or Oman or wherever these talks have
Speaker 3: been going on, sitting around, waiting and waiting and waiting,
Speaker 3: and you know, getting dragged along. In fact, he told Trump,
Speaker 3: We're just they're just dragging us along. And then as
Speaker 3: soon as the operation was over, Trump emphasized, would we'd
Speaker 3: still like to negotiate? Of course, I know they won't.
Speaker 3: But that thing diplomacy had failed, not because of lack
Speaker 3: of American patients, but because of iragn and duplicity. And
Speaker 3: that was echoed by Secretary of Saint Marco Rubio when
Speaker 3: he went on Face the Nation and Sunday Morning Futures
Speaker 3: with Maria Bartiromo. Iran had buried centrifuges beneath three hundred
Speaker 3: feet of rock for a reason, and predictably, everything that
Speaker 3: was discussed on face the nation. She tried, Margaret Brendan did.
Speaker 3: She tried every which way she could to try to
Speaker 3: convince her audience. I guess then, no, no, no, no, let's
Speaker 3: not what happened at all. Oh that's precisely what happened.
Speaker 1: Take a listen.
Speaker 4: Are you saying there that the United States did not
Speaker 4: see intelligence that the Supreme Leader had ordered weaponization.
Speaker 5: Order it I think that question being asked in the media,
Speaker 5: that's any rolevant.
Speaker 4: Question in US intelligence assessment.
Speaker 6: You know it's not. Yes it was. I know that
Speaker 6: better than you know that, and I know that that's
Speaker 6: not the case.
Speaker 3: But whether I love this, I have to say I
Speaker 3: told Dragon, you know, we have to have those damn
Speaker 3: pre production meetings again. Just drives me crazy. Oh my god,
Speaker 3: he came in here. You know you wanted to. He
Speaker 3: wanted to sit and talk and chat, you know, tell
Speaker 3: me about everything he does. Like, oh my god, just
Speaker 3: shut up. But anyway, I said to him, Marco Rubio
Speaker 3: has literally turned in to be I think one of
Speaker 3: the best Secretary of States that this country has ever had.
Speaker 1: Listen again, I love this.
Speaker 3: Margaret Brennan is trying to make the argument that well,
Speaker 3: wait a minute, what about weaponization? Well what does the
Speaker 3: word weaponization mean? Which Rupio will go on to explain
Speaker 3: why she's she's using language that doesn't mean anything. And
Speaker 3: as he points out, when she says, well we know
Speaker 3: he don't know. You do not know, and if you
Speaker 3: do know, I want to know how you know, because
Speaker 3: this is intelligence that I have that you do not have.
Speaker 4: Are you saying there that the United States did not
Speaker 4: see intelligence that the Supreme Leader had ordered weaponization order?
Speaker 5: That's irrelevant. I think that question being asked in the media.
Speaker 5: That's an irrelevant question me.
Speaker 4: In US intelligence assessment.
Speaker 6: You know, no, it's not. Yes, it was that political.
Speaker 6: I know that better than you know that, and I
Speaker 6: know that that's not the case. But no, it's not.
Speaker 3: No, it's not No, I know that better than you do.
Speaker 3: And I'm telling you know, it's not.
Speaker 5: Whether the order was given, and the people will say
Speaker 5: that it doesn't matter the order was given. They have
Speaker 5: everything they need to build nuclear weapons. Why would you bury?
Speaker 5: Why would you bury things in a mountain three hundred
Speaker 5: feet under the ground. Why would you bury? Why do
Speaker 5: they have sixty percent in rich uranium? You don't need
Speaker 5: sixty percent and rich area. The only countries in the
Speaker 5: world that have uranium at sixty percent are countries that
Speaker 5: have nuclear weapons, because they can quickly make it ninety
Speaker 5: they have all the elements they have.
Speaker 6: Why are they why do they have a space program?
Speaker 5: Is a ron going to go to the moon? No,
Speaker 5: they're trying to build an ICBM.
Speaker 6: But that's a question.
Speaker 4: That's a question, that's a question of intent. And you
Speaker 4: know in the intelligence assessment that it was that Iran
Speaker 4: wanted to be a threshold. See you use those I'm
Speaker 4: talking on what the intelligence marches.
Speaker 1: How do you know.
Speaker 3: What the intelligence assessment says? You know, sometimes Margaret Brennan
Speaker 3: I think is a maybe she's into S and M
Speaker 3: or something, because she goes on and she just gets
Speaker 3: beat ooh vestment.
Speaker 4: And that's why I was asking you if you know
Speaker 4: something more from it?
Speaker 5: That's inaccurate representation of it. That's an accurate representation of it.
Speaker 5: That's not how intelligence is read, that's not how intelligence
Speaker 5: is used. Here's what the whole world knows. I forget
Speaker 5: about intelligence. But the IAEA knows they are enriching uranium
Speaker 5: well beyond anything you need for.
Speaker 6: A civil nuclear program.
Speaker 5: So why would you enrich uranium at sixty percent, right,
Speaker 5: if you don't intend to one day use it to
Speaker 5: take it to ninety and.
Speaker 6: Build a weapon.
Speaker 5: Why are you developing ICBMs. Why do you have eight
Speaker 5: thousand short range missiles in two to three thousand long
Speaker 5: mid range missiles that you continue to develop.
Speaker 6: Why do you do all these things?
Speaker 5: I have to everything they need for a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 5: They have the delivery mechanisms, they have the enrichment capability,
Speaker 5: they have the highly.
Speaker 6: Enriched uranium that is stored.
Speaker 5: That's all we need to see, right, Well has the
Speaker 5: regime that's already involved in terrorism and proxies and all
Speaker 5: kinds of things around.
Speaker 6: They are the source of all.
Speaker 4: Yes, and no one's disputing. No one's disputing that. I'm
Speaker 4: not doing that here. And they were censured at the
Speaker 4: IAEA for that enrichment and for violating their non proliferation agreements.
Speaker 4: I was simply asking if we had intelligence that there
Speaker 4: was an order to weaponize, because you said weapon is
Speaker 4: z See.
Speaker 1: She does not get it at all.
Speaker 3: She's so focused on her talking that you know her
Speaker 3: producers have put in front of her that she cannot
Speaker 3: She's not listening to what he says, her question is
Speaker 3: essentially this, how do you know that the Ayatola gave
Speaker 3: the order to weaponize? And Rubio's pointing out, that's not
Speaker 3: the question. It's not about an order to weaponize. They're weaponizing.
Speaker 3: That's why they have uranium at sixty percent and in
Speaker 3: just a day they can make it to ninety percent.
Speaker 3: Why I love the fact about why are they building ICBMs?
Speaker 3: Are they building rockets because they want to go to
Speaker 3: the moon? No, because they want to put a warhead
Speaker 3: on top of it. The order for if you want
Speaker 3: to play this kind of semantics, the order for weaponization
Speaker 3: was done years ago when the Iatola said let's start up,
Speaker 3: let's start a military nuclear weapons program. And so they
Speaker 3: turned to North Korea to start getting advisors and getting help.
Speaker 3: And they build the program, and they start enriching the
Speaker 3: ury uranium, they start building the rockets so that they
Speaker 3: can deliver the warheads. They start doing all those things.
Speaker 3: The order was given long long time ago. Sweet are
Speaker 3: they if you want to argue that, But his point
Speaker 3: is that's not how we assess things. We assess things
Speaker 3: of Okay, they're doing this, this, this and this, and
Speaker 3: when you add up this this, this.
Speaker 1: And this.
Speaker 3: It equals a military grade Nike your weapon. So that's
Speaker 3: all we need to know. Now, if she had asked,
Speaker 3: did he give the order to launch? Might be an
Speaker 3: entirely different question. It's just the media, the cabal is
Speaker 3: just you know, for those that don't listen to them.
Speaker 3: Remember I talked about on Friday and I talked about
Speaker 3: it again on Saturday. How now, with artificial intelligence, it's
Speaker 3: just hard to believe anything that you not just read.
Speaker 3: But now it's hard to believe almost anything that you see. Well,
Speaker 3: it's not artificial intelligence in this case. But I don't know.
Speaker 3: I mean, I understand why, because everybody inside the Beltway
Speaker 3: wants to know who's on the Sunday shows and what
Speaker 3: they say. And it's just it's just like a little sorority.
Speaker 3: They just all have to say who's on today and
Speaker 3: who's saying what? And you know, who's going to get
Speaker 3: their hat handed to them. And this is the opportunity
Speaker 3: for the networks to really try to expose their biases.
Speaker 3: And that's precisely what she's doing here. She has no clue,
Speaker 3: She truly has no clue what she's talking about because
Speaker 3: she's so blinded by her ideology that she can't see that. Oh,
Speaker 3: there's a lot lot bigger picture going on here than
Speaker 3: a technical question of whether or not the Iyatola has
Speaker 3: given an order to weaponize. That's not even the question.
Speaker 3: So go back to just well, let me just say this. Predictably,
Speaker 3: the press is going to try to recast this operation
Speaker 3: as an escalation on our part. But when you look
Speaker 3: at the historical context, it's unambiguous. Every administration since Ronald
Speaker 3: Reagan has tried to cajole Iran with carrots and avoid
Speaker 3: the stick. And what have we gotten as a result
Speaker 3: of that? Now, don't closs over this. What have we
Speaker 3: gotten from every president who has tried to cajole do
Speaker 3: whatever they could beg Please borrow, bend over backwards, reach
Speaker 3: down and bend over and grab your ankles everything.
Speaker 1: What have we gotten?
Speaker 3: Hamas has the law, the hoothy militias, a shadow empire
Speaker 3: of terrorism that is all funded by Tehran, from the
Speaker 3: all of Beirut to the marine barracks in Beirut to
Speaker 3: the rocket pads in Gaza. Iran has never paid a
Speaker 3: price for this conduct until now. So for me, Ruvio
Speaker 3: was seasoned, He was sharp and he was unequivocal. They
Speaker 3: thought they could do with President Trump what they've done
Speaker 3: with presidents in the past and get away with it.
Speaker 3: And they found out last night that they cannot. So
Speaker 3: I kind of put the critics of the president in
Speaker 3: two very predictable camps. The first are the Beltway moralizers
Speaker 3: who continue to pretend that Iran is just some misunderstood
Speaker 3: power whose calls for genocide are just rhetorical. Go to
Speaker 3: Israel sometime, watch the as I have watched the rockets
Speaker 3: being launched from Gaza, and then tell me it's just rhetorical.
Speaker 3: The second, which I think is even more cynical, is
Speaker 3: a class of permanent Washington bureaucrats, politicos, k Street consultants, everybody,
Speaker 3: who see every single military maneuver as an opportunity to
Speaker 3: somehow rehabilitate their own sagging legacies. And I think both
Speaker 3: groups are entirely wrong. Trump, unlike Bush or Obama, is
Speaker 3: not nation building, and he's certainly not appeasing. What is
Speaker 3: he doing. He's engaging in deterrence, and this deterrence is
Speaker 3: not rhetorical and it is not conditional. And Vance drove
Speaker 3: that point home when he appeared on Stephanopolopolis's program when
Speaker 3: he said, we did not attack the nation of Iran,
Speaker 3: We did not attack any civilian targets, we did not
Speaker 3: even attack military targets outside of the three nuclear webs facilities.
Speaker 1: And that distinction matters.
Speaker 3: It's the difference between just war, I don't mean just
Speaker 3: just like just war, just simply war, and reckless engagement.
Speaker 3: That's probably a hallmark of what you know. I refer
Speaker 3: to Trump two point zero. Maybe we ought to refer
Speaker 3: to Trump Doctrine two point zero. No nation building, no entanglements,
Speaker 3: but no appeasement, just results.
Speaker 1: And so what happens.
Speaker 3: Next, well, Rubio pointed that out. That's going to depend
Speaker 3: well let me quote him. It will depend on what
Speaker 3: Iran chooses to do next. It's up to them. And
Speaker 3: the President has made clear that if ron wants diplomacy,
Speaker 3: he's got that door wide open. And he's also said,
Speaker 3: but if you choose escalation, then we stand ready to
Speaker 3: respond with the same degree of clarity and precision.
Speaker 1: But to do what.
Speaker 3: To protect our assets, to protect our people, our citizens,
Speaker 3: and our military personnel. So if you choose to escalate
Speaker 3: and you come after us, they'll be holy hell to pay.
Speaker 3: So don't ignore the broader strategic message, and that is
Speaker 3: the strike reminds the world that the United States under
Speaker 3: Trump does not negotiate with threats, doesn't tolerate regimes who
Speaker 3: use diplomacy as a cover for uranium enrichment. And it
Speaker 3: also reminds our allies Israel, George, Egypt in the oppolent
Speaker 3: that American strength is once again credible, and it reminds
Speaker 3: our adversaries that the air of multilateral drift is over.
Speaker 7: I don't know why Democrats would be so upset about
Speaker 7: Trump's actions with Iran look to me to be mostly
Speaker 7: a peaceful bombing.
Speaker 1: I love this audience. I forgot it.
Speaker 3: I forget where I heard this, but I want you
Speaker 3: to listen to This is from top Gun Maverick. Is
Speaker 3: this life imitating art or art imitating life?
Speaker 1: That's just creepy to me. That's just very, very creepy.
Speaker 1: Somebody mentioned this at on the text line.
Speaker 7: And I want to just thank everybody, and in particular God,
Speaker 7: I want to just say, we love you God, and
Speaker 7: we love our great military. Protect them. God bless the
Speaker 7: Middle East, God bless Israel, and God bless America.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much, Thank you, boom short sweet to
Speaker 1: the point.
Speaker 7: Oh the US military carried out massive precision strikes on
Speaker 7: the three key nuclear facilities in the Iranian regime, Bordeaux,
Speaker 7: Natance and Esfahan. Everybody heard those names for years as
Speaker 7: they built this horribly destructive enterprise. Our objective was the
Speaker 7: destruction of iran nuclear and richment capacity and a stop
Speaker 7: to the nuclear threat posed by the world's number one
Speaker 7: state sponsor of terror. Tonight, I can report to the
Speaker 7: world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran's
Speaker 7: key nuclear and richmond facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. Iran,
Speaker 7: the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace.
Speaker 7: If they do not, future attacks would be far greater
Speaker 7: and a lot easier. For forty years, Iran has been
Speaker 7: saying death to America, death to Israel. They have been
Speaker 7: killing our people, blowing off their arms, blowing off their
Speaker 7: legs with roadside bombs, that was their specialty. We lost
Speaker 7: over a thousand people, and hundreds of thousands throughout the
Speaker 7: Middle East and around the world have died as a
Speaker 7: direct result of the hate. In particular, so many were
Speaker 7: killed by their general Cassem Solmoni. I decided a long
Speaker 7: time ago that I would not let this happen.
Speaker 1: It will not continue.
Speaker 7: I want to thank and congratulate Prime Minister, bb Net
Speaker 7: and Yahoo. We worked as a team like perhaps no
Speaker 7: team has ever worked before, and we've gone a long
Speaker 7: way to erasing this horrible threat to Israel. I want
Speaker 7: to thank the Israeli military for the wonderful job they've done.
Speaker 7: And most importantly, I want to congratulate the great American
Speaker 7: patriots who flew those magnificent machines tonight and all of
Speaker 7: the United States military on an operation the likes of
Speaker 7: which the world has not seen in many, many decades.
Speaker 7: Hopefully we will no longer need their services and this capacity.
Speaker 1: I hope that's.
Speaker 3: So, and I believe now interestingly, conservatives, liberals inside the Beltway,
Speaker 3: outside the Beltway, all across the political spectrum, is this
Speaker 3: raging debate about Congress has not declared war? Well, okay,
Speaker 3: is that what you want? Do you want Congress to now?
Speaker 3: I mean some have actually advocated we need to come
Speaker 3: back and we need to exercise our constitutional duty to
Speaker 3: declare war. Now that was put in the Constitution to
Speaker 3: put some limits on the executive. Do you think we're
Speaker 3: engaged in a war. You see, I don't. We'll get
Speaker 3: to the the authorization for use of military force to
Speaker 3: AUMF in just a second. But I'm oh, not bewilders,
Speaker 3: not the white right word. Nothing bewilders me anymore. I
Speaker 3: guess I'm just fascinated by those that you would expect
Speaker 3: to be Trump supporters, Tucker Carlson, Steve Bannon to be like, Okay,
Speaker 3: this was very limited. This was you know, on point
Speaker 3: and just in and out, and that's all. We did.
Speaker 3: No civilians, not even I'm going to make an assumption
Speaker 3: that there were workers inside the facilities. The three that
Speaker 3: we attacked and they brought, they've probably they've certainly been killed.
Speaker 3: But there was no attack on any military installations unless
Speaker 3: you want to count these nuclear facilities as military installations.
Speaker 3: But I'm talking about air bases or places where military
Speaker 3: personnel are located, or any of their launchers or anything else.
Speaker 3: It was just the nuclear sites and that was it.
Speaker 3: Yet Bannon goes off the deep end.
Speaker 8: We can listen and people on Fox, Oh, it's good
Speaker 8: versus evil.
Speaker 6: It's good, Yo, dude.
Speaker 8: John Adams said, if you want to go, you know,
Speaker 8: don't go abroad from monsters to say they're monsters all
Speaker 8: over the world. We can do the good and evil everywhere, everywhere, everywhere?
Speaker 6: Is that what we're gonna do?
Speaker 1: It's good versus evil, let's go.
Speaker 8: I would think if you're going to do good versus
Speaker 8: evil and kind of weigh them up, maybe we should
Speaker 8: be marching on Beijing.
Speaker 1: Let's roll, let's do it. See.
Speaker 3: I don't think that follows logically at all. Is Beijing
Speaker 3: a strategic.
Speaker 1: Threat to us? Yes, so is Russia, so is North Korea?
Speaker 3: But are they doing anything and have they done anything
Speaker 3: over the past forty years now?
Speaker 1: Who knows?
Speaker 3: Maybe some of the kind of strange accidents we have
Speaker 3: with the power grid, certainly cyber attacks, so maybe we
Speaker 3: are under attack in a you know, in an asymmetrical
Speaker 3: war with with the Chinese Communist Party. But nobody wants
Speaker 3: to skill bomb Beijing. Nobody wants to do that. Nobody
Speaker 3: wants to skill bomb Moscow, nobody wants to skill bomb Pyongyang.
Speaker 3: I mean, we know, you know, Kim Jong nun, little rocketman,
Speaker 3: is going to bitch and moan and make threats and
Speaker 3: launch lobbs lobbs rockets into the South China Sea. He
Speaker 3: may mess up someday and accidentally hit Japan. We might
Speaker 3: have to do something. But that's a false equivalence.
Speaker 8: I don't hear any voices there for that. It's interesting.
Speaker 8: Is Labaijing not worthy of that? It's because they're Chinese
Speaker 8: are not worthy of that?
Speaker 1: Is that? What it is?
Speaker 6: Is that?
Speaker 1: What it is is that? What it is?
Speaker 3: No.
Speaker 8: I think a major FARA investigation should take place in
Speaker 8: Fox News.
Speaker 1: I believe that thoroughly.
Speaker 8: I think we need to see if they represent the
Speaker 8: foreign government.
Speaker 3: News needs to go register with the Foreign Agents Registration
Speaker 3: Night for because Fox News is representing a foreign government?
Speaker 3: Is is this? Is this some form of anti Semitism?
Speaker 1: Is this? Oh, the Jews control the media, Jews control Hollywood,
Speaker 1: Jews control the bankers. Is that what you're saying to you?
Speaker 1: Abandon agent?
Speaker 8: I think you got to check the cell phone, see
Speaker 8: the data, check the emails. What was going back and forth?
Speaker 8: What they were pushing on the American people? What are
Speaker 8: they pushing on the American people? Where did this information
Speaker 8: come from? I think it's very I think it has
Speaker 8: to happen. You can't have somebody cheerleading you onto war.
Speaker 8: You have to sit there. We haven't been cheerleading against
Speaker 8: doing it. What we're saying, first off, number one, we
Speaker 8: believe it should be done right. We agreed that the
Speaker 8: Mouli should not get nuclear weapons. We believe there's many
Speaker 8: paths to do that. President Trump was pursuing other paths
Speaker 8: as he was from the None of those paths, said
Speaker 8: We're going on the path of kinetic warfare.
Speaker 1: None of them. Okay, none of them.
Speaker 8: Well, we got jand it because last Thursday night had
Speaker 8: to do it, had to do it, had to do it,
Speaker 8: had to do it, had to do it, had to
Speaker 8: do it. Then we did with a sense of urgency.
Speaker 8: The phony sense of urgency had upsell. Now any regime change,
Speaker 8: regime change, regime change, gotta do it, gotta do it.
Speaker 1: You're not Maga, You're not Trump. You're not team Trump.
Speaker 1: You're not team Trump.
Speaker 6: A luck, bro.
Speaker 8: We've been in these trenches with Trump a long time.
Speaker 8: We know who teammates are and who Arriva stays.
Speaker 3: Wow, I'd just say that's a little bit crazy. So
Speaker 3: the two thousand and one Authorization to Use Military Force,
Speaker 3: I'm going to argue that it gave congressional approval for
Speaker 3: President Trump's decision to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities. It was
Speaker 3: passed after the nine to eleven attack, and it authorized
Speaker 3: the use of force against any nations who sponsored terrorism
Speaker 3: if it is in the national interest in the United
Speaker 3: States to do so. I'll take a break here early
Speaker 3: because I want you to hear the exact language that
Speaker 3: Congress authorized.
Speaker 1: That's next. Good morning from South Dakota.
Speaker 9: Let's just say part of my trip, I was in Missouri,
Speaker 9: and that's all I can say about that.
Speaker 1: Everyone, have a great day, all right, all right.
Speaker 3: Before I go to John Bulten, who you would expect
Speaker 3: to say what he's going to say, let's go to
Speaker 3: Congressman Corey Mills on CNN.
Speaker 10: I'm asking about the president's new post last night, where
Speaker 10: he did talk about regime change in a way that
Speaker 10: did seem different than what we heard. And then I
Speaker 10: was asking you if you supported US military strikes for
Speaker 10: the purpose of regime change.
Speaker 6: But we've established that you do not.
Speaker 10: So let's move on to a new subject, and that's.
Speaker 1: The role of Congress in this.
Speaker 10: I want to play some sound from your Republican College,
Speaker 10: Thomas Massey.
Speaker 6: We haven't been briefed.
Speaker 11: They should have called us all back and Frankly, we
Speaker 11: should have debated this war powers resolution that Rocanna and
Speaker 11: I offered instead of staying on vacation and doing fundraisers
Speaker 11: and saying, oh, well, the President's got this under control.
Speaker 6: We're going to seed our constitutional authority.
Speaker 10: So what's your response to Congressman Massey about that?
Speaker 1: Oh, that's pretty sample.
Speaker 9: The president, under Article two, section two has a limited
Speaker 9: executive war power authority. And it was Congress, though I
Speaker 9: disagreed with it, who abdicated our Article one section eight
Speaker 9: Claus eleven through thirteen war powers with the aumfs, these
Speaker 9: aum MEPs, these authorized use of military force has gone
Speaker 9: on since nineteen fifty seven, nineteen ninety one one and
Speaker 9: two for the global war on terrorism. So if we
Speaker 9: consider Iran to be the largest state sponsor of terror,
Speaker 9: and we know that the one two AAMS was built
Speaker 9: on the idea of stopping terrorists around the globe, it
Speaker 9: does give the president the necessary war power authorities. And
Speaker 9: this is not in any way unconstitutional.
Speaker 10: So you actually think that Iran is covered with the
Speaker 10: post nine to eleven aumvs.
Speaker 6: Let me just ask that flat. Do you believe Iran
Speaker 6: is covered in that?
Speaker 9: I think Article two Sections two war power authorities.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Article two, Section two War.
Speaker 9: Power Auctories of the Executive Branch covers this up to
Speaker 9: a sixty day period, and there was no decoration of war.
Speaker 9: This was a precision strike and this was not for
Speaker 9: the intention of con trying to inflate or escalate a
Speaker 9: war with Iran. It was just to stop their nuclear
Speaker 9: weapon capabilities.
Speaker 3: I love it when a congressman actually knows what he's
Speaker 3: talking about. Now you would expect the following from John Bolton,
Speaker 3: because well it's former Ambassador John Bolton. Of course he's
Speaker 3: going to say this.
Speaker 6: It was a side from boots on the ground.
Speaker 10: But military strikes are still military action. And I'm not
Speaker 10: arguing whether or not it is a worthy goal. I'm
Speaker 10: just asking if regime change is a stated goal. Understands,
Speaker 10: self defense is part of international law, but US law,
Speaker 10: I think would seem to suggest that removing a regime
Speaker 10: in a country would be an act of war, either
Speaker 10: needing a constitute, either based on a constitutional authority or the.
Speaker 6: War Powers Resolution.
Speaker 10: Do you think the president has the authority to can
Speaker 10: direct new military strikes for the purpose of regime change?
Speaker 1: Now, what's going on here?
Speaker 3: What's the cabal shifted to what's what's their tactic now,
Speaker 3: get everyone to believe that Trump engage either engaged in
Speaker 3: with the Operation Midnight Hammer, or is planning to engage
Speaker 3: in regime change. But I guess the full scale invasion
Speaker 3: of Iran. That's what they're trying to get everybody to believe.
Speaker 3: Oh my gosh, here's another forever war. Here's here's where
Speaker 3: we're going to go in and we're going to pull
Speaker 3: down the statues of the Ayatola and there'll be a
Speaker 3: glamoring everybody, you know, another color revolution, and then we'll
Speaker 3: back off and not support them, and there'll be another
Speaker 3: failed stay and we'll be there for twenty years. That's
Speaker 3: their argument. That's what they're trying to convince you of.
Speaker 3: They cannot stomach, they cannot intellectually accept that that's not
Speaker 3: what Donald Trump did and he has no intention of
Speaker 3: engaging in regime change. And in fact, if you go
Speaker 3: to read that true social post about regime change, he's
Speaker 3: doing the typical trolling that he normally does. In fact,
Speaker 3: I would say that what he's trying to do is
Speaker 3: he's trying to get whatever dissidents there are both in
Speaker 3: this country and in that country in or on itself.
Speaker 3: That hint, hint, this might be a good time. You know,
Speaker 3: the Ietola is hidden in the bunker somewhere. I've decapitated
Speaker 3: the Israelis have decapitated the military. You don't have any
Speaker 3: air defenses. You've got a bunch of drones that you're
Speaker 3: not using. And by the way, all of your proxies
Speaker 3: they've all shot, they've all shut down. They're not saying
Speaker 3: a word. They they have, they've been disemboweled. They have
Speaker 3: no leadership. They took don't Don't you even find it
Speaker 3: interesting that Hamas the houthis Hesbi law, Hesbelaw.
Speaker 1: They've they have spent.
Speaker 3: Billions of dollars on Hebe law. The Uranians have to
Speaker 3: stockpile hundreds of thousands of missiles and rockets, and Hesbe
Speaker 3: law has total siten, total sight. If that doesn't tell
Speaker 3: you who's in charge and if they're mere proxies for
Speaker 3: the Molahs in Iran, and I don't know what will
Speaker 3: So I got off track a little bit. Let's go
Speaker 3: through that authorization could to use some military force AUMF
Speaker 3: right after the news