Speaker 1: The Assault force comes down into Maduro's compound. Apparently this
Speaker 1: was like the presidential compound. The Delta operators quickly entering
Speaker 1: and clearing the target structure. Maduro actually ran for the
Speaker 1: panic room, trying to seal himself inside this panic room.
Speaker 1: He was trying to get the door closed when the
Speaker 1: Delta operators rolled up on him and detained him.
Speaker 2: Everybody, welcome to another episode of Eyes on Geopolitics. I'm
Speaker 2: here with Jack Murphy, Mick mulroy Irish Brothers today.
Speaker 3: Of course.
Speaker 2: Yeah, a lot popped off over the last twenty four
Speaker 2: to thirty six hours. Nicholas Mudua was captured by a
Speaker 2: jaysuck raid. Primarily it looks like led by Delta Force
Speaker 2: with some CIA help.
Speaker 3: Obviously.
Speaker 2: There's been reported that ground branches on the ground since
Speaker 2: August in a safe house in carac Is shucking and jobbing,
Speaker 2: doing some covert operations, doing what they do. It also
Speaker 2: was reported that there were somebody close in the inner
Speaker 2: circle of Maduro that was, you know, handing over a
Speaker 2: ton of intelligence to the United States. You know, fifty
Speaker 2: million sounds nice. I would probably do the same thing
Speaker 2: if I lived in Venezuela and it all went down.
Speaker 2: It looked like it went down pretty smoothly. One helicopter
Speaker 2: took some damage and there were a couple of injuries.
Speaker 2: But those those folks were brought to I think San Antonio,
Speaker 2: right because there's a Level one trauma center there at
Speaker 2: DD one to get you know, get better. Honestly, it
Speaker 2: was you know, we've been I've been doing the team
Speaker 2: House for a long time with Jack and Dave, and
Speaker 2: we've been, you know, interviewing.
Speaker 3: Guys like this.
Speaker 2: This is probably the best thing that the America can
Speaker 2: actually do. And I think it's all downhill after this,
Speaker 2: if I'm being completely honest. Maduro was transferred to the
Speaker 2: us SEO Jima vent to Guantanamo. Now he's in he's
Speaker 2: like three miles away from me in Brooklyn, hanging out
Speaker 2: and he's gonna be brought up on charges.
Speaker 3: So it was an insane operation.
Speaker 2: I can't wait for the next few years when we start,
Speaker 2: when the guys start retiring and coming on the Team
Speaker 2: House and telling us about it. Buffer Right now, let's
Speaker 2: talk about what went down yesterday.
Speaker 3: I mean, you guys take your picks to go first.
Speaker 1: I'd just like to go a little bit into some
Speaker 1: of the background, and if my voice gives out, I apologize.
Speaker 1: I'm getting kind of sick. So it's good we're doing
Speaker 1: this remotely.
Speaker 4: So one of the.
Speaker 1: Things that kind of like plays into how this unfolded
Speaker 1: was over the last four years there have been a
Speaker 1: lot of dissatisfaction in the Venezuelan military because of Manduro,
Speaker 1: you know, basically promoting his loyalists, you know, people who
Speaker 1: are incompetent, and so that's creating that created a break
Speaker 1: within the Venezuelan military. And then the other thing was
Speaker 1: there are a couple high level of defections. I think
Speaker 1: one of them was Venezuela's intel chief and another was
Speaker 1: one of the guys that ran state run oil companies
Speaker 1: over there. And those defections, as I understand it, were
Speaker 1: te too enabling the CIA to know who to work
Speaker 1: with on the ground, to put them in touch with
Speaker 1: resistance networks on the ground, and there was a local
Speaker 1: source network and resistance network on the ground that played
Speaker 1: a key part of this operation. So then around September October,
Speaker 1: as I understand it, the planning process for this operation
Speaker 1: really kicked up and they went into what's known as
Speaker 1: operational preparation of the battlefield or environment, depending on the
Speaker 1: acronym you want to use. You know, we mentioned, you know,
Speaker 1: Special Activities was on the ground. Absolutely, this CIA was
Speaker 1: all over this one. The unit known as is I
Speaker 1: or is A or MSO or again whichever acronym we're
Speaker 1: using this day. But Army Intelligence also, yeah, greatly involved
Speaker 1: in the OPE portion of this, and that involves a
Speaker 1: couple of different things. You notice that the lights got
Speaker 1: turned out in Caracas similar to how they got turned
Speaker 1: out in Abadabad before the operation took place. As I
Speaker 1: understand it, we had complete control of the Venezuelan comm
Speaker 1: system when we went in there, and then there's a
Speaker 1: few and then there's a few more things that as
Speaker 1: we run up to the actual operation. But Mick, I'll
Speaker 1: let you take it from there.
Speaker 5: Sure. Yeah. So I's start with absolutely well done on
Speaker 5: the part of Jaysuck and obviously my old outfit supporting them.
Speaker 5: You know, we'll get into the legalities a bit, but
Speaker 5: I think everybody can be proud of how this was executed.
Speaker 5: And I agree with you d it's one of the
Speaker 5: things that the US does the best right project power
Speaker 5: anywhere in the world, based on exquisite intelligence, which really
Speaker 5: needs to happen, or it's a risk not worth taking
Speaker 5: if you don't have that intelligence. Right, So I don't
Speaker 5: I mean, you already repeated what was reported on what
Speaker 5: the agency did. I don't know that to be true,
Speaker 5: but I'm imagine it is, and I imagine somebody out
Speaker 5: there is talking about it. Likely. I think it's exceptional
Speaker 5: if they did insert a team on the ground that
Speaker 5: was there for that many months. Took a lot of
Speaker 5: cuts to do that, and a lot of a lot
Speaker 5: of very skilled tradecraft, and it it apparently did lead
Speaker 5: to knowing exactly where and when Manduro would be, which
Speaker 5: is really a necessity when it comes to deploying a
Speaker 5: force like Delta. It's it's incredibly dangerous to go into
Speaker 5: a built up urban environment with that amount of force.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 5: It's very risky.
Speaker 6: Uh.
Speaker 5: And they did it, and they did it really well. Yes,
Speaker 5: there was some you can expect that. You know, there's
Speaker 5: gonna be some injuries. Unfortunately, let's all think about the
Speaker 5: guys as a get better, and then of course, the
Speaker 5: damage to the helicopter pats off one hundred percent. The
Speaker 5: question is going to be and I think Jack needs
Speaker 5: to get into some more of the details, because the
Speaker 5: Nyboy's written about this. Before we get into legality everything
Speaker 5: that came out with the press conference. Specifically to Maduro,
Speaker 5: I think it's important to point out that he wasn't
Speaker 5: a legitimate president. He had lost the election and stayed
Speaker 5: in power, and he has been indicted for five years.
Speaker 5: He is the head of a drug cartel, so I
Speaker 5: get the questions on the legality. Comparing it to Noriega,
Speaker 5: There's some differences there, especially when it came to the
Speaker 5: aftermath and Noriega's point, as soon as we got him,
Speaker 5: the actual elected government leader was sworn in like the
Speaker 5: day after if you go back and look at history.
Speaker 5: So we played it a little different there. But as
Speaker 5: far as the actual apprehension, Jordane a well done. Hats
Speaker 5: off to the military, hats off to my old organization
Speaker 5: to support it, and I think that it's a good
Speaker 5: thing that he's off the streets.
Speaker 1: One of the things that I've heard was that we
Speaker 1: had recruited a source very close to Maduro who was
Speaker 1: able to provide basically real time updates on his movements
Speaker 1: the last couple of weeks. So when the chairman of
Speaker 1: the Joint chiefs of Staff stood up yesterday and he said,
Speaker 1: like we were tracking where he was going, where he
Speaker 1: was sleeping, even who you know, what his pets were, Like,
Speaker 1: that's probably pretty that's probably pretty accurate in this case.
Speaker 1: And the you know, speaking to the legality a little
Speaker 1: bit before we get into the bigger picture, that the
Speaker 1: ope piece of this operation, as I understand it, was
Speaker 1: conducted under the two thousand and one Authorization for the
Speaker 1: Use of Military Force the aum F, which is very interesting.
Speaker 1: The AMF is being used to justify basically any sort
Speaker 1: of military action anywhere in the world. I'm not saying
Speaker 1: that's the correct legal interpretation, but that's how it's been
Speaker 1: interpreted and how it's been used. And it's also being
Speaker 1: used to justify the strikes against the alleged drug boats
Speaker 1: off the coast, so that it's you know, a post
Speaker 1: nine to eleven legal authority that continues to haunt us
Speaker 1: for better or worse. So as far as the operation itself,
Speaker 1: there were a couple guys from the FBI Hostage Rescue
Speaker 1: Team on board the helicopters. There were about eleven helicopters,
Speaker 1: three Little Birds, two Chinook, six Blackhawks about that crossed
Speaker 1: into Venezuelan airspace around one am local time.
Speaker 5: Where did they launch from?
Speaker 4: You know checked, I believe off the coast, so from.
Speaker 5: A ship because we have let's just say, in logo inside,
Speaker 5: we have a lot of former Sale Team six and
Speaker 5: Delta guys. So if they launched from a ship, this
Speaker 5: is going to be really funny. Yes, there's going to
Speaker 5: be a lot of back and forth on that one.
Speaker 1: For this operation, I'm told that there was a Delta squadron,
Speaker 1: a DEV Group squadron, and a Ranger battalion all deployed
Speaker 1: for it. The assault force itself consisted of Delta and Rangers.
Speaker 1: I'm trying to make sure I'm one hundred percent on this,
Speaker 1: but I believe it was C Squadron from Delta and
Speaker 1: three seventy five third Ranger Battalion that was on the
Speaker 1: assault force. They used Terraine masking basically to hide their
Speaker 1: radar signature as they infiltrated into Venezuela. Hopped up over
Speaker 1: that last terrain feature and assessed that they had still
Speaker 1: maintained the element of surprise at that point. During the
Speaker 1: final leg of the ingress, there's a huge strike package.
Speaker 1: It sounds like about one hundred and fifty aircraft in
Speaker 1: the air began suppressing the air defense systems air strikes.
Speaker 1: And those local source networks on the ground that I
Speaker 1: mentioned earlier were, as I understand it, huge and enabling
Speaker 1: this operation. That they emplaced a lot of technical devices
Speaker 1: like jammers, beacons. You know, bombing beacons is a thing
Speaker 1: not too many people talk about, but that's been around
Speaker 1: since the sixties. So those local source networks were a
Speaker 1: big part of helping this operation move forward. And again,
Speaker 1: as I mentioned, the lights popped off as they were
Speaker 1: heading in, and President Trump said during the press conference,
Speaker 1: he said, we did that using a expertise. We have
Speaker 1: make of that what you will. The assault force comes
Speaker 1: down into Maduro's compound. Apparently this was like the presidential compound.
Speaker 1: They came in, rangers helping with the isolation piece on
Speaker 1: the target, the Delta operators quickly entering and clearing the
Speaker 1: target structure, and as we were told in the press conference,
Speaker 1: Maduro actually ran for the panic room. I was trying
Speaker 1: to seal himself inside this panic room. He was trying
Speaker 1: to get the door closed when the Delta operators rolled
Speaker 1: up on him and detained him. And at that point
Speaker 1: him and his wife surrendered themselves and they were placed
Speaker 1: under arrest by the FBI agents who were on this operation.
Speaker 1: Before we get into the exfiltration, anything you want to
Speaker 1: add their mick.
Speaker 5: Well, I would like to add, you know, hats off
Speaker 5: to the one sixtieth right, sometimes they don't get the
Speaker 5: credit that this. Remember it has happened without the absolute
Speaker 5: skilled expertise.
Speaker 4: And you already mentioned the hard part of the mission, right.
Speaker 5: Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, And you know, I think the
Speaker 5: chairman said yesterday they flew about one hundred feet above
Speaker 5: the water. I mean, I'm not a helicopropilot, but I
Speaker 5: know how hard that is. Hundred feet above the water
Speaker 5: at night, going into an area where you're probably guessing
Speaker 5: you're going to get shot at a lot, because you know,
Speaker 5: we try to mitigate the air threats. But you know,
Speaker 5: so super hats off to them, and hats off of
Speaker 5: the cyber guys. Somebody did that, whatever it was to
Speaker 5: get the you know, we don't tend to give them
Speaker 5: enough credit. That is a real big advantage when we
Speaker 5: are very capable of fighting at night. That's what thing
Speaker 5: the United States does better than anybody else. And it's
Speaker 5: only effective if you could make it night, right, So
Speaker 5: you got to make it night, and that's what they did.
Speaker 5: So I just wanted to add those two you know,
Speaker 5: had a voice to that, those two groups.
Speaker 1: So as the aircraft came in for the extraction, there
Speaker 1: were more suppressive fires, more air strikes around the target area.
Speaker 1: They got onto the aircraft, and you know, they apparently
Speaker 1: were told that they you know, the helicopters fired back
Speaker 1: in self defense.
Speaker 5: One of the helicopters ground fire against our ground.
Speaker 4: Yeah, of course there was ground fire.
Speaker 1: One helicopter was hit but remained fliable, and they took
Speaker 1: back off and I believe the time they gave was
Speaker 1: about three thirty am that they crossed back into international
Speaker 1: airspace and back to whatever the platform that they launched from. Now,
Speaker 1: what were I'm told that the DEV group guys that
Speaker 1: were there for that operation not on the assault package,
Speaker 1: but they had secondary targets that they were hitting, and
Speaker 1: quite frankly, I don't know what those targets were right now,
Speaker 1: but they played in the action. So yeah, a lot
Speaker 1: of different folks got to play, uh during this operation
Speaker 1: in different ways.
Speaker 4: I And then let's see what's the next.
Speaker 5: Is it true that they did a whole compound like
Speaker 5: they did a mock compound, and.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I was told Camp McCall they built like
Speaker 1: a scale, like a two scale, perfect replica. It may
Speaker 1: it may not have been McCall. There's another training area
Speaker 1: that Jaysack uses in that area that's not technically McCall.
Speaker 1: It's a different place, but it doesn't matter. Yeah, they
Speaker 1: did do like full mission rehearsals for all of this,
Speaker 1: and mcduro himself. I'm told that they've been recording him
Speaker 1: basically constantly since he was first detained in order to
Speaker 1: refute any allegations of torture that come down the line
Speaker 1: that they are not they're not they are not torturing him,
Speaker 1: and I'm told that actually some of the things that
Speaker 1: have been done that they are treating him as a
Speaker 1: representative of the state of Venezuela, even though we understand
Speaker 1: him to be an illegitimate leader. So they're they're not
Speaker 1: like walking him in the orange jumpsuit with the blindfold on.
Speaker 1: They're not going quite that route with it. But he
Speaker 1: is being watched to make sure that you know, there
Speaker 1: aren't these these allegations down the line, And as you
Speaker 1: pointed out, the he landed here in New York City,
Speaker 1: I think last night.
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, And.
Speaker 1: I'm told right now the Department of Justice is hoping
Speaker 1: that they can flip his wife.
Speaker 4: So we didn't mention that.
Speaker 1: But the wife, Cecilia, was detained a charge, so they
Speaker 1: have something.
Speaker 4: Yeah, they're trying to flip her.
Speaker 1: But I'm not a legal expert, but I believe there
Speaker 1: is some legal stuff about flipping a spouse.
Speaker 3: It's kind of.
Speaker 1: Something that's like in the in the court of law.
Speaker 1: It's considered like something that you can't really do because
Speaker 1: a spouse is never going.
Speaker 5: To be like a spouse. It's almost like, you know,
Speaker 5: you have like a priest and a lawyer type.
Speaker 2: I don't know if that's I don't know if that's
Speaker 2: an admissible in reality.
Speaker 5: I think they can either one can wait. I don't
Speaker 5: think it's not near a strong obviously as a lawyer
Speaker 5: client privilege, but there is a spousal privilege.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, there is some some legal hiccups there. But
Speaker 1: and also the the indictment itself. I read through it
Speaker 1: yesterday and the indictment is like almost laughable. It's like
Speaker 1: kind of a joke. And I've been told it's basically
Speaker 1: just a boiler plate drug conspiracy indictment, and they're probably
Speaker 1: gonna have to update it somewhere down the line because
Speaker 1: like the stuff they're charged, the stuff that's in there,
Speaker 1: it's like, yeah, good luck even proving that in a
Speaker 1: court of law.
Speaker 2: Well, the one where he's talking about using machine guns
Speaker 2: against the that those were kind of laughable sounding charges.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean there was I remember there was an
Speaker 1: indictment that came down in Gaddafi. At one point I
Speaker 1: read through that and that was equally laughable. It's like
Speaker 1: it felt like a you know, a high school kid
Speaker 1: wrote that in his mom's basement over a weekend or something.
Speaker 5: But they're going to have to produce evidence to get
Speaker 5: I mean, this is just an indictment. That's just to
Speaker 5: get an indictment, and that's a low standard to get convictions,
Speaker 5: you know, beyond a reasonable doubt. They're going to have
Speaker 5: to declassify some intelligence and prove that he was running
Speaker 5: this drug cartel. I'm not saying they can't, but they're
Speaker 5: going to have to be ready to really disclose some
Speaker 5: information because.
Speaker 4: They can't lose this.
Speaker 5: If they lose this, but are they going to fly
Speaker 5: him back.
Speaker 3: Just send them back. Yeah, like that's insane.
Speaker 1: So the other thing that I wanted to mention was
Speaker 1: that I was told that this was phase one of
Speaker 1: the operation and that there are other phases, other stages
Speaker 1: that may or may not be executed, the triggers of
Speaker 1: which are kind of ambiguous from what I'm hearing. But
Speaker 1: you know, Trump seemed to confirm this himself during the
Speaker 1: press conference where he said, I have a second wave,
Speaker 1: a much bigger wave. Actually second wave can be launched,
Speaker 1: So there are other stages of this that can be
Speaker 1: launched if things deteriorate inside Venezuela. We did leave all
Speaker 1: the other TEA leaders in place in Venezuela. That was
Speaker 1: very intentional. We pulled the Duro out, but we did
Speaker 1: not decimate the leadership element in the country because we're
Speaker 1: hoping that they're going to figure things out. Now, this
Speaker 1: is kind of, in my opinion, kind of a dicey strategy,
Speaker 1: like good.
Speaker 4: Luck, bro.
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, hope it the whole works out, but that
Speaker 1: that is why we did that. And if things deteriorate
Speaker 1: over the next you know, twenty four to forty eight hours,
Speaker 1: you could see some of those other stages of the
Speaker 1: operation launched.
Speaker 2: If you're in the market for a new mattress, you've
Speaker 2: probably seen all the brands out there vuying for your attention.
Speaker 2: Big names, splashy ads, all promising the same thing. But
Speaker 2: here's the only brand that does it right. It's ghost Sped.
Speaker 2: Ghostped was created and is still run by manufacturing experts
Speaker 2: with more than twenty years of mattress making experience. They
Speaker 2: know the craft and they know how to build a
Speaker 2: bed that actually lasts. So how do you They offer
Speaker 2: premium mattresses for up to fifty percent off less than
Speaker 2: the competition. It's not hype, it's smart logistics. As a
Speaker 2: family owned company, that means there's no board of investors
Speaker 2: to answer to. It's is folks working hard selling mattresses.
Speaker 2: These are the true manufacturing pros and the result is
Speaker 2: an exceptional cooling and comfort at a price that won't
Speaker 2: keep you up at night. Every Ghostped mattress includes proven
Speaker 2: cooling materials back by a twenty to twenty five year
Speaker 2: Warring Tea. You also get one hundred and one night's
Speaker 2: sleep trial with free returns if the mattress doesn't work
Speaker 2: for you, and fast free shipping. Most orders arrive in
Speaker 2: two to five days right now. As a Teamhouse listener,
Speaker 2: you can get twenty five percent off site wide for
Speaker 2: a limited time. You can just go to gosped dot
Speaker 2: com slash house and use a promo code house at checkout.
Speaker 2: That's gosped dot com slash house promo code house. Upgrade
Speaker 2: your sleep. Ghost Sped the makers of the coolest beds
Speaker 2: in the world. Some exclusions apply see site for details.
Speaker 2: I want to think ghost Sped so much for continuously
Speaker 2: supporting us. Been going on a year almost so I
Speaker 2: really appreciate that. I hope you guys, if you're in
Speaker 2: the if you're in the market for mattresses or pillows
Speaker 2: or betting, check out ghost bed. You can go to
Speaker 2: ghost bed dot com slash house and get twenty five
Speaker 2: percent off right now.
Speaker 3: Love you and love ghost bed. Thanks guys.
Speaker 5: That's risky because like, deteriorating situation is not generally the
Speaker 5: time you want to send in US forces. Like what
Speaker 5: are they going to do quell a nation of twenty
Speaker 5: five million people? I mean think about just do the
Speaker 5: math on that, and under coin theory, that's like six
Speaker 5: hundred thousand troops necessary to actually and we're not doing that.
Speaker 5: So I not Nick No, I mean I have to say,
Speaker 5: I mean there was differences legally Noriega, there was a
Speaker 5: treaty to defend the canal. There was US forces that
Speaker 5: were in Panama at the time that Noriega was apprehended,
Speaker 5: So there was in some ways more of a legal
Speaker 5: justification and self defense both to the canal, which we
Speaker 5: had responsibility treaty obligation to do and defound our forces, right,
Speaker 5: But it was similar in the fact that we arrested
Speaker 5: and brought them to the United States, tried and convicted him.
Speaker 5: I think they had a strong case obviously to make
Speaker 5: the apprehension of Maduro legally. But then when we got
Speaker 5: to the press conference, then the issue of we're going
Speaker 5: to run Venezuela, I see no legal justification for that internationally.
Speaker 5: We're going to take the oil that's clearly not allowed internationally.
Speaker 5: Now the question is, well, there's like Excellent and Chevron,
Speaker 5: they had their infrastructure basically taken by the government of Venezuela,
Speaker 5: and I think they have an actual judgment of a
Speaker 5: billion dollar so a legal judgment, obviously, I think they
Speaker 5: should be made whole. But that doesn't mean the United
Speaker 5: States gets to take the resources of another country just
Speaker 5: because they had a bad dictator, right, But that belongs
Speaker 5: to the people of Venezuela. And then the other part
Speaker 5: is this idea that Machado has no support. You know, Machado,
Speaker 5: the Nobel Piot Prize recipient. I am not a Venezuela expert.
Speaker 5: I know Venezuelan experts. They say that's totally not true.
Speaker 5: And the ones I know are on the right side
Speaker 5: of the political spectrum, firmly on the right, and they
Speaker 5: have told me in no uncertain terms. She did win
Speaker 5: the election. It was a stand in that won seventy
Speaker 5: percent of the vote. She wasn't allowed to run or
Speaker 5: she would have won probably more. And she has a
Speaker 5: lot of support in Venezuela. And if she were to
Speaker 5: come back, she could then legitimize the government. The United
Speaker 5: States could then work with them as another democracy that's
Speaker 5: more pro US, less pro Iran and Russia, and then
Speaker 5: we could develop their oil infrastructure and everybody's a winner.
Speaker 5: But it sounds like what we're doing is keeping somebody
Speaker 5: in place and we think we can control and then
Speaker 5: we're gonna somehow of her and through her.
Speaker 3: So they're hoping that VP that just became president Delta.
Speaker 5: Corrupt, is I mean she has to be?
Speaker 3: Yeah, right, she was.
Speaker 5: She goes all the way back to Hugo Chavez as
Speaker 5: part of this cabal. They're all the same, so it's
Speaker 5: part of the regime. She's just as corrupt and illegitimate
Speaker 5: as Maduro was. So if we're using that argument as
Speaker 5: a reason to remove Maduro, same thing with her and
Speaker 5: the Secretary of Defense Lopez Minister of Interior apparently is
Speaker 5: even worse. So my question was like, okay, good job
Speaker 5: on that, but what are we going to do going forward?
Speaker 5: We actually think and she said she's not going to
Speaker 5: listen to the United States. So as soon as we
Speaker 5: said we're going to control the government through her, she said, no,
Speaker 5: you're not.
Speaker 3: Can you blame her?
Speaker 5: Of course, if she would have said yes, she might
Speaker 5: have been ripped the shreds by the rest of the regime.
Speaker 5: There's three things that I would question. One, why announce it?
Speaker 5: You've just put her in a horrible place. And if
Speaker 5: that was the plan, not a not a good stept
Speaker 5: A puppet.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, I don't knowssarily show the strings, dude, it's
Speaker 2: supposed to be visible.
Speaker 5: And then two, when why announce it you're actually running
Speaker 5: the show. Yeah, so you said she's gonna Yeah, it
Speaker 5: just didn't make sense to me why you would do that.
Speaker 5: And then we don't need the oil either, well, I.
Speaker 4: Mean we don't.
Speaker 5: We don't personally need the oil. Like we have a
Speaker 5: lot of oil reserves in the United States, we don't tap.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: If our issue with oil here is the heavy CREWD
Speaker 2: stuff that we import mostly from Canada from and that's
Speaker 2: what Venezuela has, and we have a lot of refineries
Speaker 2: in and along like the uh, the Gulf.
Speaker 5: But we would still have access to it if it
Speaker 5: was a friendly government.
Speaker 3: Sure, absolutely, we don't have to.
Speaker 5: Have a puppet government, right, that's what I mean by like,
Speaker 5: we don't need to take the oil.
Speaker 3: I agree with that, right right, yeah.
Speaker 5: Right, I mean what standard are we setting around the
Speaker 5: world if that becomes.
Speaker 2: A pretty bad one, honestly, because why can't Chinea be
Speaker 2: like we're just taking Taiwan.
Speaker 5: It's the same neo colonialism as.
Speaker 2: Well as as well as Russia, like we're just taking Ukraine,
Speaker 2: you are trying to.
Speaker 5: So yeah, I get that we should have access to
Speaker 5: it and then we might help develop it and for
Speaker 5: the benefit of Venezuelan's as well as Americans. Right, there's
Speaker 5: a way to do this the right way. It seems
Speaker 5: like announcing that she's a puppet, saying that we're going
Speaker 5: to control it, and saying we're going to take the
Speaker 5: oil are not the ways.
Speaker 2: Well, there were some reports to a couple months back
Speaker 2: when the build up started that Medora was negotiating with
Speaker 2: the US about like, hey, we'll cancel our contracts with
Speaker 2: China and Russia in terms of developing our own and
Speaker 2: we'll work with you guys.
Speaker 3: And that was a no go.
Speaker 5: So is that a no go? That seems like a
Speaker 5: go go.
Speaker 3: I don't know. I guess they need they wanted to win.
Speaker 5: On the strategy. I question the strategy here, Yeah, and
Speaker 5: what do you disclose it once?
Speaker 3: You don't?
Speaker 5: I think I think there's a way the US can
Speaker 5: significantly benefit from the removal of Maduro economically and politically.
Speaker 5: Probably just gonna need to do something different Uncarau.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the US will run Venezuela for now until transition
Speaker 2: with no specifics is kind of I'm getting like this
Speaker 2: is like deja vous all over again. Uh, you know,
Speaker 2: I mean, I guess we're being honest though, at least
Speaker 2: for in terms of our administration's interests of what they
Speaker 2: really want, and it sounds like they really want the
Speaker 2: oil and not just hey, we'll be partners with you guys.
Speaker 2: It's just like we want the oil. And I don't
Speaker 2: know how that does. How that happens without like a
Speaker 2: quarter million plus US troops on the ground of Venezuela.
Speaker 5: So we can take the take the oil to for
Speaker 5: economic benefit for guess companies. It's not gonna be for
Speaker 5: our country or be for literally US.
Speaker 2: I'm assuming they're not going to nationalize the oil indu
Speaker 2: she in the US, but like, yeah, it's for the
Speaker 2: oil companies.
Speaker 5: I don't think couldn't they just do that? And also,
Speaker 5: I mean they think about it long term. You'd have
Speaker 5: to do a counterinsurgency plan forever because you're taking their
Speaker 5: natural resources. They're not going to like it. There's twenty
Speaker 5: five million of them. It's twice the size of California.
Speaker 3: I'm with you still in a fact, it's bat yeah.
Speaker 5: And we could just work with them. They get a
Speaker 5: benefit people. I mean, it's seventeen trillion dollars worth of
Speaker 5: UH oil reserve, right, that's a win win scenario. For
Speaker 5: everybody involved, right, and it could be the one of
Speaker 5: the wealthieth countries in the world that's bigger than Saudi Arabia.
Speaker 5: Like there's enough for US oil companies, which they need
Speaker 5: the expertise. They always need the expertise, right, but could
Speaker 5: also benefit the people of Venezuela. If you do it
Speaker 5: the other way, they're going to want to be the
Speaker 5: biggest insurgency. Then you'll have to quail for as long
Speaker 5: as you're there. I mean, maybe we're going further than
Speaker 5: what they intend to do, to be fair, and I
Speaker 5: do think it was a very well done operation, and
Speaker 5: I'm with them on Maduro paying the piper. But my
Speaker 5: question is going forward, you know, the endgame. It's always
Speaker 5: the endgame.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, I think it was a ten out of
Speaker 2: ten operation. I mean, like there's nobody better than Jaysack
Speaker 2: and the CIA doing this. But like I said, when
Speaker 2: we started, it seems the US is really good at that.
Speaker 2: But everything else kind of starts to go downhill after
Speaker 2: that after the military operation, you know what I mean,
Speaker 2: Like we're really good at like fucking things up, like
Speaker 2: in terms of doing what the military is supposed to
Speaker 2: do best in the world. Obviously, because you see what
Speaker 2: Russia tried to do in terms of a decapitation strike
Speaker 2: in Ukraine. It's fast forward almost four years now they're
Speaker 2: still there. We did it in one night, in two
Speaker 2: in not even two hours, right, So we're really good
Speaker 2: at that. It's just what comes after is we're not
Speaker 2: really at least our track record shows that we're not
Speaker 2: good at it.
Speaker 5: Yeah, we need our policy folks to be as good
Speaker 5: as our special operations military. It's almost always the failure
Speaker 5: to plan after the.
Speaker 2: I want to touch on a little bit about the
Speaker 2: international law stuff, because there will be there is a
Speaker 2: big debate going on in terms of that where you
Speaker 2: guys at in terms of you know, with that, I
Speaker 2: mean just going in and whether he's illegitimate or not.
Speaker 2: He's a dictator and he's not there. He's the president
Speaker 2: of the country and we captured him.
Speaker 5: I think we should stop calling people who are a
Speaker 5: legitimate presence.
Speaker 1: The term that your dea guys you sometimes is habeas grabus.
Speaker 1: The in the FBI, even before nine to eleven, was
Speaker 1: involved in renditions and that that's essentially that's essentially what
Speaker 1: this was. It was a rendition. It wasn't a traditional
Speaker 1: jasok capture kill mission like it was for Bagdaddy or
Speaker 1: Solamani was a kill that Daddy was probably capture kill.
Speaker 1: But with the it's it's very interesting and very odd,
Speaker 1: and I don't really know the answer as far as
Speaker 1: like what title authorities this was conducted under. It sounds
Speaker 1: to me like this was considered a Department of Justice
Speaker 1: operation enabled by the military. In this sense, the Rangers
Speaker 1: and Delta guys are like the escorts for the FBI
Speaker 1: agents to get them in there and serve an arrest warrant.
Speaker 1: And we can serve arrest warrants internationally, although going into
Speaker 1: sovereign countries and by military forces a different matter. So yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, I think it's going to be interesting. But
Speaker 1: the other question, though, is like, because the AUMF is
Speaker 1: used to justify anything, and it's in the age that
Speaker 1: we're in right now, I think there's a legitimate question
Speaker 1: that to ask, like does it matter? Does it really
Speaker 1: matter what the law is, because who's going to hold
Speaker 1: anyone accountable for any of this. I'm sorry to sound cynical,
Speaker 1: but you know, we do this stuff over and over again,
Speaker 1: and there's no accountability in government at all, and it
Speaker 1: seems like we can bend and sometimes break the law
Speaker 1: to do things, and you know, we don't let it
Speaker 1: get in our way all that much.
Speaker 4: So yeah, I mean that's that's like Congress is a
Speaker 4: take on it.
Speaker 5: Yeah, to go down the legalsh.
Speaker 3: Sorry, did you go No, I'll go ahead on.
Speaker 5: The legal side. So I mentioned Noriega, which seems like
Speaker 5: we had more more evidence that it was lawful back
Speaker 5: then because of our true presence. But it's support to
Speaker 5: point out we were roundly condemned by the UN. They
Speaker 5: passed a referendum saying that what we did was illegal
Speaker 5: back in nineteen nineties. Gonna happen again. So under the
Speaker 5: charter of the u N you either you can't violate
Speaker 5: a nation's sovereignty unless you get a Security Council resolution,
Speaker 5: which wasn't going to happen because you know, Brush is
Speaker 5: gonna veto the hell out of that, or you're under
Speaker 5: an imminent threat. That's where the administration, the White House
Speaker 5: is saying we were I guess from drugs, but important
Speaker 5: to point out that drugs from Venezuela mostly cocaine. I
Speaker 5: think a majority of it actually goes to Europe, right,
Speaker 5: So they were trying to like make ft and all
Speaker 5: like a weapon of mass discresson stuff that's all Mexico,
Speaker 5: that comes.
Speaker 3: Out of Mexico.
Speaker 5: So yeah, the parts.
Speaker 1: Yeah, So, I mean the drugs is such a pretext
Speaker 1: and they're not even really be asking us too much
Speaker 1: about it being a pretext. I mean they're saying it's.
Speaker 5: About now, they're saying it's about the oil. Yeah, so
Speaker 5: that's not an eminent threat. So you're defeating your own argument, right, right.
Speaker 5: But to Jack's point, like, well, who you arguing with,
Speaker 5: because just they don't care. They generally don't care what
Speaker 5: the rest of the world's gonna if they are going
Speaker 5: to condemn them. So, but you're defeating your argument when
Speaker 5: you say it's about the oil, because that's not animate threat.
Speaker 5: So we'll have to see. But the other point Jack made,
Speaker 5: if there's no balance of powers, there's no checks and balance,
Speaker 5: there's no congressional oversight, there's no congressional response. They just
Speaker 5: they get on talk shows, podcasts and then they're gonna
Speaker 5: do what they want. Right, that's the only place to
Speaker 5: really hold them accountable. If you think this is unlawful.
Speaker 5: I didn't think it was, but I'm not you know,
Speaker 5: international legal efsword. But I do clearly think taking a
Speaker 5: country's natural resources because because what I mean, what's the
Speaker 5: justification you've now you've even taken the justification of Maduro
Speaker 5: was a was a terrorist leader off the table because
Speaker 5: he's he's sitting in a jail cell next to d
Speaker 5: right now, right, So there's there's no justification for taking
Speaker 5: a nation's natural resources. It's clear under the law, it's
Speaker 5: potentially a war climb under all the Geneva Conventions that
Speaker 5: we only not only supported, but we drafted, Like most
Speaker 5: of those things in the UN's early creation after World
Speaker 5: War Two was done by the United States to put
Speaker 5: us at the pinnacle of the world order. And now
Speaker 5: we're violating the very things that we didn't want to
Speaker 5: see happen, and that kept us as the leader of
Speaker 5: the free world or created us as a layer of
Speaker 5: free world. So big, big time. I think strategic and
Speaker 5: policy implications going forward if we if we do something
Speaker 5: like physically take the oil. If they or maybe they're
Speaker 5: just being clumsy with the way they're saying it, but
Speaker 5: I hope that's the case.
Speaker 2: I mean, forget even international law because like that seems
Speaker 2: to be very flexible. Uh, just like you said, we
Speaker 2: told Congress after it happened, like even the Gang of Eight,
Speaker 2: we didn't tell before. And I understand the reason you
Speaker 2: want to keep a secret and you want it to
Speaker 2: be a success.
Speaker 3: Totally understand that.
Speaker 5: But uh, it looked like the New York Times and
Speaker 5: Washington Post this information and they that goes to the
Speaker 5: whole point of kicking him out of the Pentagon. They
Speaker 5: still got the information and they did the right thing.
Speaker 5: They didn't they didn't spill the beans.
Speaker 3: Horrible. Yeah, I'm with that.
Speaker 2: I mean, likely if you're gonna put guys in Harmon's
Speaker 2: way like that's it's not there. They're doing honestly, I
Speaker 2: mean this is also a flexible term that they're doing
Speaker 2: their job and what they're ordered to do. But uh,
Speaker 2: I mean the way that this administration kind of skirts
Speaker 2: the law is pretty pretty unbelievable, and frankly, the way
Speaker 2: the opposition reacts to it is also unbelievable because they
Speaker 2: are completely and utterly toothless.
Speaker 3: Cowards.
Speaker 2: Gonna be honest, from my own Senator shoe Hakeen Jeffries,
Speaker 2: they are gultless, They have no balls whatsoever. We obviously
Speaker 2: know the Republicans are going to go which whoever way
Speaker 2: the administration goes, But you're the opposition party and just
Speaker 2: to go along.
Speaker 5: Look, suld have their own agency too, right, they shouldn't
Speaker 5: just be in theory.
Speaker 3: Yeah, you would think, you'd think.
Speaker 5: I'm no question of why we even have that branch
Speaker 5: of government. All I do is pass the NDAA, Right,
Speaker 5: that's literally it. Well we could just have that just
Speaker 5: rubber you know, chink. Yeah, even if you agree with it,
Speaker 5: I think you would still want even if you agree
Speaker 5: with everything the administration is doing, and I have friendly
Speaker 5: most style, mostly on the right, even if you agree
Speaker 5: with you, you'd still want a Senate that actually can
Speaker 5: put a check What if the next government like this
Speaker 5: is on the other side of the aisle and there's
Speaker 5: nobody to you know, that's the constitution that was set
Speaker 5: up for a reason.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I completely agree with you, man.
Speaker 2: I mean, the Senate and a House, their jobs are
Speaker 2: serious jobs and they should take them seriously, and the
Speaker 2: fact that they aren't is an absolute joke. Just saying
Speaker 2: this as an American citizen, Jack your thoughts.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean again, I mean this is just like
Speaker 1: the unprecedented sort of times that we're in, and I mean,
Speaker 1: I often think and people rightly, you know, call things
Speaker 1: out and say, you know, that's illegal. We say, you know,
Speaker 1: that's hypocritical, that's inconsistent. But those things can be true,
Speaker 1: and we can also be in this moment where none
Speaker 1: of that matters. Like, I find that arguing about these inconsistencies,
Speaker 1: it doesn't move anyone's opinion, It doesn't change anyone's stance.
Speaker 1: That's unfortunate. You know, I wish we could have more
Speaker 1: open conversations about these things. But for Jack Murphy to
Speaker 1: sit here and be like, you know, that's a hypocritical policy,
Speaker 1: why can you you should be doing that when you're
Speaker 1: doing this, no one cares. I mean, that's that's the
Speaker 1: that's the moment we're in right now. No one cares
Speaker 1: about that. We're not interested in policy, regulation, lawful governance,
Speaker 1: like well, like we're just not really tethered to these
Speaker 1: things anymore as near as I can tell. And the
Speaker 1: courts seem to be, you know, hanging by a thread,
Speaker 1: maintaining some semblance of normalcy and in providing checks on power.
Speaker 1: But yeah, we're we're in some interesting waters here as
Speaker 1: a country.
Speaker 5: Do you think that would change if you had the
Speaker 5: draft come back.
Speaker 1: A lot of change real quick. If rich people's kids
Speaker 1: started getting drafted into the military, a lot of things
Speaker 1: would change in this country.
Speaker 4: Very sang.
Speaker 5: There's no consequences right now. That's why they they're kind
Speaker 5: of indifferent to it.
Speaker 1: It's like, and that's why we went and did Maduro
Speaker 1: because there's so little consequence, Like what are the what
Speaker 1: are the Russians going to do about Venezuela? What are
Speaker 1: the Chinese going to do?
Speaker 4: Nothing?
Speaker 1: They're not going to do anything. And that's why we
Speaker 1: go after Venezuela. We picked these fake fights, you know,
Speaker 1: like we did with Denmark and Greenland and this kind
Speaker 1: of stuff, because this administration does understand they can't resolve
Speaker 1: our problems with Russia, they can't resolve our problems with China,
Speaker 1: they can't resolve our problems with Iran or North Korea.
Speaker 1: Like these these are quagmires that they're unable to solve.
Speaker 1: But they see something like Maduro and like, that's a
Speaker 1: feather in your hat. You can go and do that.
Speaker 1: And there's basically no repercussion. And as we've seen, the
Speaker 1: American public doesn't consider airstrikes and special ops rates to
Speaker 1: be war that doesn't phase them at all.
Speaker 5: Right, So you think we're going to see indictments of
Speaker 5: the leaders of Ukraine and Taiwan next. I mean, are
Speaker 5: they just going to duplicate us and say, okay, well
Speaker 5: this is a breakaway province, it's a rebel leader. He's
Speaker 5: under indictment in Beijia.
Speaker 4: Maybe the same.
Speaker 5: Thing with come up with some reason for Zelenski he
Speaker 5: targeted my house, which he didn't, but even if he did,
Speaker 5: that's what could happen. They just duplicate our.
Speaker 1: My understanding also is that Marco Rubio is one of
Speaker 1: the driving forces behind all of this, and that uh,
Speaker 1: he has Havana squarely.
Speaker 4: In his sights.
Speaker 1: Next he said, so yeah, yeah, that this a lot
Speaker 1: of this is about like closing that whole bay of
Speaker 1: pigs loop that's been going on for the last you know,
Speaker 1: fifty sixty years. And and they're thinking that this Venezuela
Speaker 1: op can be a template that can be used elsewhere.
Speaker 5: So we could see indictments.
Speaker 4: Of yeah leaders.
Speaker 2: This Venezuela isn't done yet, right, Like, I mean, what
Speaker 2: happens next in the next days, weeks and months?
Speaker 3: Now?
Speaker 5: Really good question? What if nothing changes? Right? We got
Speaker 5: Dua on trial and the regime is still in place. Yeah,
Speaker 5: they're still dealing with Iran, and they're still dealing with Russia.
Speaker 5: They're still trying to run drugs.
Speaker 2: Yes, that's what I don't get about this. The Cuba thing.
Speaker 2: I get a Cuba is like a historical black eye
Speaker 2: for the United States, I guess. But it's a fucking
Speaker 2: little baby island that like it means nothing. And I
Speaker 2: guess that's to your point, Jack, where you were mentioning
Speaker 2: like this is like relatively low hanging fruit, right, instead
Speaker 2: of like you know, brinksmanship with China and the South
Speaker 2: China Sea over Taiwan, where it's like, holy shit, we
Speaker 2: could lose tens of thousands of sailors and personnel.
Speaker 5: And we're doing nothing about the current exercise. That's just
Speaker 5: the bade of Taiwan.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 2: That was like kind of unprecedent too, right, Like this
Speaker 2: wasn't like our new thing. This wasn't like a plane
Speaker 2: thing that they kind of like they kind of telegraph
Speaker 2: a little bit like this seemed like it was out
Speaker 2: of nowhere.
Speaker 5: It was because we approved like eleven billion dollars worth
Speaker 5: of sale of arms to Taiwan, which we have a
Speaker 5: law that kind of requires us to do that.
Speaker 2: I need some speculation out of speculation time, what happens
Speaker 2: over the next weeks and months. Does Delchi Rodriguez play
Speaker 2: ball with the administration? Does she what?
Speaker 3: What are we looking at?
Speaker 5: I just had somebody text man thinks she fled the country.
Speaker 5: I don't know if that's true.
Speaker 2: There was some rumor about that yesterday that she went
Speaker 2: to Russia, did a press conference.
Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, I don't think she'll leave.
Speaker 1: I think, you know, it's on the ground in Caracas.
Speaker 1: So far, we haven't seen like some sort of uprising
Speaker 1: or crime spree. You haven't seen widespread chaos, which leads
Speaker 1: you to think that Maduro maybe wasn't quite as important
Speaker 1: as any people or as many of us may have thought.
Speaker 1: He was right, He didn't have a sort of importance
Speaker 1: to the people on the ground that live there. And
Speaker 1: as long as the vital services are kept running, you know, electricity,
Speaker 1: sewer pipes, water, so on, that it's kind of business
Speaker 1: as usual for them, you know, And it's one dictator
Speaker 1: replaced with another from their point of view more than likely. So,
Speaker 1: you know, in the it seems like things are relatively
Speaker 1: stable right now. But we're still going to need some
Speaker 1: sort of a long term solution to Venezuela.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I'm also not convinced that, you know, you can just
Speaker 1: swear in this VP and suddenly American oil companies are
Speaker 1: going to be able to operate freely in Venezuela. I'm
Speaker 1: not sure it's that simple.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I think the United States should use what they're doing,
Speaker 5: like the oil tanker seizure, to pressure the government to
Speaker 5: have free and fair election. Machado can come back, she wins,
Speaker 5: she wins, doesn't, she doesn't, or whoever wins, right, And
Speaker 5: then that government we work with to help build up
Speaker 5: as a partner, and I'm sure they would give us
Speaker 5: access to them. I mean they already had in the past.
Speaker 5: And then again, the US we get the benefit of,
Speaker 5: you know, this huge reservoir of oil in our old
Speaker 5: own hemisphere, and the people of Venezuela would get a
Speaker 5: lion's share of it. I mean that's you know, maybe
Speaker 5: it's an idealistic way to look at it, but I
Speaker 5: think it's also an easier path board than trying to
Speaker 5: run the country from Washington, d C. Which is just
Speaker 5: not a possibility. And like Jack said, they're not uprising.
Speaker 5: So it's not even it's not going to happen organically.
Speaker 5: Where they are uprising is a run and I rememb
Speaker 5: we're going to talk about that today there's there's protests
Speaker 5: with seventy different.
Speaker 2: Yeah, to touch on that. I mean, we see what's
Speaker 2: going on. I mean, what what are you hearing about that?
Speaker 2: I mean, I know, like there, their economies in the shitter,
Speaker 2: their drought, there's a drought there.
Speaker 3: It's a fucking absolute nightmare.
Speaker 5: It is a nightmare. They've run it like most regimes,
Speaker 5: they've run into the ground. They basically just worry about
Speaker 5: the preservation of the regime. They're under a huge sanction,
Speaker 5: so that cost. That's also part of the problem.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 5: But every time these uprisings has happened, the only thing
Speaker 5: this regime is good at is quite like an uprising.
Speaker 5: So I don't know why the president is talking about,
Speaker 5: you know, direct military actions as a protest. But one
Speaker 5: thing that President Obama said back in two thousand and
Speaker 5: nine the Green Revolution is he should have said, like
Speaker 5: we should we should promote you know, because it would
Speaker 5: be overthrowing a regime very hostile to us and potentially
Speaker 5: getting a demo democracy in Tehran, and it's in a
Speaker 5: very advanced modern culture, like very smart. It would be
Speaker 5: I think great to have as a partner going for
Speaker 5: so whatever the United States can do, and I'm not
Speaker 5: talking like air strikes or anything like, although a lot
Speaker 5: of our friends are tracking a large flow of air
Speaker 5: aircraft going into Europe right now, similar to the I
Speaker 5: want sixty if I don't understand, but like all of
Speaker 5: the large refuelers and transport aircraft. So I don't know
Speaker 5: if there was something of an agreement between a President
Speaker 5: Trump and Prime Minister Nan Yahoo and another strike on
Speaker 5: her on Iran, I don't think that's related to the protests,
Speaker 5: probably more rel to their reported desire to get a
Speaker 5: nuclear weapon. There's been some I think credible reporting that
Speaker 5: the Supreme Leader has decided to do that, something he
Speaker 5: hasn't done in the past. If that's the case, they're
Speaker 5: gonna it's gonna happen again. Right midnight. Hammer is gonna
Speaker 5: gotta start hammering again because we can't allow him get
Speaker 5: a nuclear weapon. It's only a couple of weeks. I
Speaker 5: think I got to change over for my next media thing,
Speaker 5: but I can hear you we got we got to
Speaker 5: really focus on the intel on that because they need
Speaker 5: to both get ninety percent enrichment. They have enough of
Speaker 5: the actual material, then they have to make the triggering
Speaker 5: device the weapon itself, and then they got to make
Speaker 5: it small enough to fit on the missiles. But they
Speaker 5: can do that all by all. Everybody I've talked to
Speaker 5: that's expert on this, they can do it. It takes
Speaker 5: a little while. Or they could buy some of it,
Speaker 5: which would speed this up substantially, like they could buy
Speaker 5: some of it from North So two things. Protests. Hopefully
Speaker 5: they're successful because then it also gets rid of the
Speaker 5: nuclear thread. But if they don't, this is just going
Speaker 5: to enhance the regimes need to have a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 5: It's the survivability of the regime, right. So we have
Speaker 5: two things coming into play, and Iran could be what
Speaker 5: we talk about in the next two weeks.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Jack, what are you thinking about our I mean,
Speaker 2: I have thoughts on.
Speaker 1: That, I'm not tracking it super closely. Yeah, I know
Speaker 1: they're having problems with inflation. The Iranians got hit by
Speaker 1: COVID pretty hard. That hit their economy too, and then
Speaker 1: of course the ongoing you know, state repression and student
Speaker 1: rights and all this other stuff. I mean, we've seen
Speaker 1: kind of these uprisings in Iran before, and every time
Speaker 1: you hope that the Iranian people are able to choose democracy,
Speaker 1: you know, you hope that it goes forward. And I
Speaker 1: think I think Iran would I mix right. I mean,
Speaker 1: Iran would make a great partner for the United States,
Speaker 1: except for the fact that they have this extremist religious
Speaker 1: government that is very antagonistic towards the United States and
Speaker 1: the United States national interests.
Speaker 5: Very sure.
Speaker 2: I don't want to be snarky, guys. I don't want
Speaker 2: to be snarky today. It's Sunday. Jaysack just did a
Speaker 2: main amazing operation. I don't want to be snark snarked out.
Speaker 2: I mean, I'll be a little snarked out. I mean,
Speaker 2: so I thought we obliterate their entire nuclear program. That's
Speaker 2: what I thought happened as a layman, right, as what
Speaker 2: I'm seeing on the news and the headlines.
Speaker 3: Obviously I know that they didn't.
Speaker 2: We didn't, but I'm talking as like the normal Joe here,
Speaker 2: when is enough enough? I don't understand, like, are we
Speaker 2: actually going to obliterate there are their ability to create
Speaker 2: a nuclear weapon. Also, they didn't enrich as much uranium
Speaker 2: when under the JCPOA one point zero. We know that
Speaker 2: for sure, and I get it. Iran is a shitty regime,
Speaker 2: Like the regime is shitty. They're religious fundamentalists and there's
Speaker 2: no room for that, whether it's Muslim, Jewish or Christian
Speaker 2: in terms of fundamentalism for me. So they're no bueno obviously.
Speaker 2: But at the same time, it's like, as the layman,
Speaker 2: it feels like we're doing Israel's bidding.
Speaker 3: I'll just say that, sorry.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, the question, I mean, does this benefit American
Speaker 1: interests or Israeli interests? And they may be aligned in
Speaker 1: some cases, but not all the time. And every anti
Speaker 1: Iranian action is not necessarily a pro American action, and
Speaker 1: that's just something to think about.
Speaker 5: It is so I have to jump.
Speaker 3: To his real job, meganics as always, thanks to you could.
Speaker 2: Jump whenever you want. I'll wrap the booth. It's like Superman.
Speaker 5: Yeahs again, do us.
Speaker 3: A favorite guys?
Speaker 2: Check out mixed new podcast called The Pub and the
Speaker 2: Porch Applied Stoicism comes out every Monday morning.
Speaker 3: It's really good.
Speaker 2: Jack Murphy The High Side, of Course came out a
Speaker 2: great article about the Inner workings of what went down
Speaker 2: with the operation to Capture Maduro came out yesterday, so
Speaker 2: check that out.
Speaker 3: That link is in the description side.
Speaker 1: I'm going to write an update to that article today
Speaker 1: too with some of the additional information I've gotten. Cool
Speaker 1: and the article is called Bold Delta Force Raid reads
Speaker 1: to Capture and Arrest of Maduro.
Speaker 5: Uh.
Speaker 1: It's up on the high Side right now, the Highside
Speaker 1: dot substack dot com.
Speaker 4: You can go check it out.
Speaker 3: And there will be a link in the description for that,
Speaker 3: so just go snatch it right there.
Speaker 2: He does it of course with Sean Naylor, legendary reporter
Speaker 2: and author. He wrote the book literally wrote the book
Speaker 2: on Jay sockerl Andless Strike. And of course you're gonna
Speaker 2: check out these interviews with the guys who did this
Speaker 2: probably in a few years from now on the team
Speaker 2: House podcast. So to support the show, both Eyes on
Speaker 2: in Eyes and the Team House where you get it
Speaker 2: for a completely ad free early You can ask us questions,
Speaker 2: watch the show's the Teamhouse episodes live. You can go
Speaker 2: to Patreon dot com slash the Teamhouse and you can
Speaker 2: help support the show.
Speaker 3: Jack, thanks for doing this. I know your throat is horse.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and we have a busy week this week too,
Speaker 2: so we got to make sure we put a pitch
Speaker 2: count on your throat.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'll try to get better.
Speaker 3: All right, guys, thank you, all right, take care of everyone.
Speaker 6: Hey, guys, I want to tell all of you today
Speaker 6: about a new newsletter that we're launching that encompasses both
Speaker 6: the team House podcast, the eyes On podcast, and the
Speaker 6: high Side News outlet, which I run with Sean Naylor.
Speaker 6: The newsletter is gonna be once a week. It's gonna
Speaker 6: come into your inbox and you're going to get the
Speaker 6: most current podcasts on eyes On, in the Teamhouse, and
Speaker 6: whatever's topical or current on the high Side. So it's
Speaker 6: another way for us to get the information out to
Speaker 6: you as social media algorithms are pretty iffy and you
Speaker 6: never really know.
Speaker 3: What you're gonna get. So this is a once a
Speaker 3: week email.
Speaker 6: It'll slide into your inbox and it will have you
Speaker 6: know the greatest hits of that week.
Speaker 5: It's really good.
Speaker 3: Checking it out.
Speaker 6: The website for it is Teamhouse Podcast dot kit dot com,
Speaker 6: slash join Teamhouse Podcast dot kit dot com slash join.
Speaker 6: Go there and you enter into your email list or
Speaker 6: you enter your email into the little thing on the
Speaker 6: website and you're good to go, and that'll be it.
Speaker 6: So we really appreciate your support and hope you'll consider
Speaker 6: signing up.
Speaker 5: Where's the link.
Speaker 6: The link will also be down in the description if
Speaker 6: you're looking for it there.
Speaker 5: And that's Teamhouse Podcast, dot kit
Speaker 6: K I t kilo India, Ango dot com, Backslash Join