Speaker 1: This is a podcast from wor is the Jesse Kelly Show.
Speaker 2: Another hour of The Jesse Kelly Show on a wonderful,
Speaker 2: fantastic Thursday. Remember we got Brandon wik At about a
Speaker 2: half hour from now talking Rutchia, Ukraine, Iran and net
Speaker 2: Yahoo stuff.
Speaker 1: We have Carol Roth next hour, but we have other
Speaker 1: things we have to discuss, and there are lots of them.
Speaker 1: Communist lies is on the list. I have a fear
Speaker 1: about how bad the Democrats are. Right now, I'll explain
Speaker 1: what I mean, but first I want to talk again
Speaker 1: in a different way, about trust, institutional trust, why it
Speaker 1: really matters in what's happening out there. So I'm gonna
Speaker 1: use this example because people, it can be confusing. What
Speaker 1: actually is power? What is short term power? What is
Speaker 1: lasting long term power? So let me explain the difference.
Speaker 1: Let's say I am. I am in charge of the
Speaker 1: police department. I'm the police chief. Small town, pretty small town.
Speaker 1: We're in West Virginia. We're in rural West Virginia, and
Speaker 1: it's a twenty person police department. I take over. I'm
Speaker 1: the police chief. I am an evil, corrupt human being.
Speaker 1: Now I use my position as police chief to fill
Speaker 1: up my twenty person police department with other evil, corrupt people,
Speaker 1: and we will deal drugs, we'll commit murders, we'll do
Speaker 1: whatever with the authority of the police department. In fact,
Speaker 1: if you because you're a part of my town, if
Speaker 1: you make me angry, if I decide I want you
Speaker 1: out of the way, maybe you witnessed me commit a crime,
Speaker 1: I have the power to gather my men, my guns,
Speaker 1: and myself and come out to your home and kill you,
Speaker 1: arrest you, shoot. You say, that's short term power. I
Speaker 1: have that, but that's not long lasting, tangible power. And
Speaker 1: here's what I mean. If I do that once twice,
Speaker 1: ten times, how many times do me and my officers,
Speaker 1: how many times do we have to commit a crime
Speaker 1: or do some kind of horribly corrupt thing until the
Speaker 1: people of my community decide they no longer trust me,
Speaker 1: they have declared me to be the enemy. And at
Speaker 1: some point in time, I hop in a car with
Speaker 1: five of my other cops and we drive out to
Speaker 1: a home to commit a crime, and we get ambushed
Speaker 1: and murdered by the people of the town. At some
Speaker 1: point it will happen. These things don't happen without end. Now,
Speaker 1: why why did I end up dying in losing my
Speaker 1: power because I lost the trust of the people, and
Speaker 1: that that is long term, lasting institutional power. And that's
Speaker 1: the most important kind of power. I realized. For the
Speaker 1: individual you when I showed up to murder you, none
Speaker 1: of the long term stuff matters because you're going to
Speaker 1: die in the short term. But on a long term scale,
Speaker 1: on a thirty thousand foot view scale, what matters for
Speaker 1: the institution. For my police department, the most important thing
Speaker 1: is that the people trust it and rely on it.
Speaker 1: If I have that, the police department will have power forever.
Speaker 1: If I violate that, if I lose that, the people
Speaker 1: will take their trust away and my least department in
Speaker 1: the end will be completely powerless at some point in time,
Speaker 1: no matter how long that takes. Maybe it's twenty years,
Speaker 1: thirty years, but it will happen. I saw this woman.
Speaker 1: She is affectionately known on this show as doctor Witch,
Speaker 1: but her name is actually doctor Wynn. She used to
Speaker 1: be in charge of Planned Parenthood. She now is obviously
Speaker 1: a contributor to CNN. She goes on there to talk
Speaker 1: about medical things. She goes on there to lie because
Speaker 1: it's CNN. She was ranting and raving about RFK Junior
Speaker 1: in some of the things he's doing. Here's what she said.
Speaker 3: This is the reason why we look to guidelines. There
Speaker 3: are medical organizations that synthesize these data. And by the way,
Speaker 3: we look up to the CDC, or at least throughout history,
Speaker 3: we have looked up to the CDC, to the FDA
Speaker 3: to compile these studies for us and to make recommendations.
Speaker 3: And this we have always throughout history depended on our
Speaker 3: federal agencies as the gold standard for expertise.
Speaker 1: Really, these federal agencies, we have looked up to them
Speaker 1: as the gold standard for expertise. Okay, she's actually not
Speaker 1: wrong about that. It we hop at a time machine, you
Speaker 1: and me, we go back to the year true not
Speaker 1: even ancient history. Twenty fifteen, And you ask Jesse if
Speaker 1: he believes the things the CDC says. Jesse says, yep,
Speaker 1: I would tell you absolutely, Maybe not everything at face value.
Speaker 1: But if the CDC put out a warning, hey, don't
Speaker 1: travel to Mexico, don't eat this, don't it. I'm listening,
Speaker 1: it's the CDC. So twenty fifteen, Jesse did very much
Speaker 1: trust organizations like the CDC. Now twenty twenty five. Jesse
Speaker 1: when the CDC is brought up, scoff and rolls his eyes.
Speaker 1: In fact, I'm looking at a headline here, I'll tell
Speaker 1: you immediately the fellows put it in front of me, Chris,
Speaker 1: Jewish producer Chris and producer Core. They put it in
Speaker 1: front of me. I read it and I physically rolled
Speaker 1: my eyes immediately. You want to know the headline new
Speaker 1: Chinese COVID strain spreads to the US. Immediately, I went
Speaker 1: from here we go again, Well, why it's only been
Speaker 1: ten years. I don't know. Maybe we should go back
Speaker 1: to this little flashback from that same doctor doctor which
Speaker 1: during COVID.
Speaker 4: Of course, I strongly believe that indoor masking should be
Speaker 4: the case, including it in really in all schools in
Speaker 4: this country at this point. But even in schools that
Speaker 4: don't have masking, parents can still do their part and
Speaker 4: take matters into their own hands. For example, talk to
Speaker 4: other parents in your child's class see if.
Speaker 3: The majority of parents would agree with you.
Speaker 4: To also put masks on their kids. Also, make sure
Speaker 4: that your child is wearing at least a three ply
Speaker 4: surgical mask, not a cloth face covering, but as that
Speaker 4: helps to protect your health and better them. Try to
Speaker 4: get the school to also disclose all positive cases and
Speaker 4: increased testing. That's something that there's sale fund.
Speaker 1: Why doesn't anybody trust these gold standard expertise organizations anymore?
Speaker 1: Because you took down the outdoor basketball hoops, because you
Speaker 1: told an entire country of three hundred million people to
Speaker 1: stand six feet away from everybody, because you closed schools,
Speaker 1: because you cost people their jobs, because people had to
Speaker 1: say goodbye to their parents by zoom in the hospital.
Speaker 1: You arrested a paddle boarder in the ocean on camera
Speaker 1: outside paddle boarding by himself. And you did all this,
Speaker 1: all this using medical expertise as your shield, and you
Speaker 1: did it as if that trust would be endless, and
Speaker 1: now you're finding out it's not. It's finite. We were
Speaker 1: talking about Harvard earlier in the show, Harvard this and
Speaker 1: Harvard that and Harvard this.
Speaker 5: Oh.
Speaker 1: I know Harvard has had a blast pushing communism into
Speaker 1: American society. But whether or not Trump stomps him into
Speaker 1: the ground in the end, it won't matter why because
Speaker 1: you're already leaving.
Speaker 6: I think going into this, I think a lot of
Speaker 6: Americans thought that hier Ed needed a nice kick in
Speaker 6: the rear end. What am I talking about here? Well,
Speaker 6: why don't we take a look at high confidence and
Speaker 6: higher education. You go back a decade ago, fifty seven
Speaker 6: percent of Americans had high confidence in higher education.
Speaker 1: Look at where we are now.
Speaker 6: That number has plummeted, plummeted as of last year, down
Speaker 6: to thirty six percent. We're talking about a thirty six
Speaker 6: point drop among Republicans. Specifically, get this, sixty eight percent
Speaker 6: of Americans said that higher education was on.
Speaker 1: The wrong track.
Speaker 6: So it's a question of whether or not people agree
Speaker 6: with Trump's tactics, but they definitely agree with him on
Speaker 6: the idea.
Speaker 1: Two thirds of the country just a little while ago, yesterday,
Speaker 1: two thirds of the country, when they heard names like Harvard, Stanford,
Speaker 1: they thought to themselves, Wow, that's pretty cool man. You
Speaker 1: would tell you got into Harvard. WHOA, Now you just
Speaker 1: heard the numbers. Two thirds of the country. When you
Speaker 1: tell them Harvard, you bring it up, they go, oh yeah,
Speaker 1: here we go. And in the end, Harvard is finding
Speaker 1: out what we've talked about over and over and over, Agune.
Speaker 1: Harvard is finding out what the FBI found out, what
Speaker 1: the medical establishment has found out, what the media has
Speaker 1: found out. They're all finding out what Jesse tried to
Speaker 1: warn everybody about years ago. Trust is necessary, and trust
Speaker 1: is not an infinite supply. You violated enough times, people
Speaker 1: will move on, and from there you'll discover that the
Speaker 1: only true power you had, long lasting power, was the
Speaker 1: trust they gave you, the legitimacy they gave you. Once
Speaker 1: they remove it, it's gone and almost impossible to get back.
Speaker 1: I'm going to expand on that just a little bit
Speaker 1: more in a second hand a Jesse Kelly show on
Speaker 1: a Fantastic Thursday. We have Brandon Wiker coming up about
Speaker 1: ten minutes from now to do all kinds of foreign
Speaker 1: policy nerd out things. But right now we're having another
Speaker 1: talk about trust, and I want to be totally upfront
Speaker 1: and honest and crystal clear about this. It's really important
Speaker 1: that we have institutions we can trust and do trust.
Speaker 1: I don't celebrate where we are, and you shouldn't either.
Speaker 1: It's a picture a home with bad parents in it,
Speaker 1: and there's a child in the home. Mom says, hey,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna make you dinner tonight so you don't go hungry,
Speaker 1: and then mom just gets drunk and passes out on
Speaker 1: the on the couch and doesn't make dinner. And the
Speaker 1: next night she tells that little boy, she tells that
Speaker 1: little girl, I'm gonna make you dinner tonight so you
Speaker 1: don't go hungry, And she gets drunk and passes out
Speaker 1: on the couch and doesn't make dinner. And this happens
Speaker 1: over and over and over and over and over again. Well,
Speaker 1: at some point in time, that child is not going
Speaker 1: to trust her anymore, not going to believe her anymore.
Speaker 1: When Mom says anything dinner, what else doesn't matter, the
Speaker 1: trust will be gone.
Speaker 7: Now.
Speaker 1: That child, out of its own self interest, out of
Speaker 1: his own self interest, should remove that trust because when
Speaker 1: mom says she'll make dinner, assume she's lying. You gotta
Speaker 1: go fend for yourself, get your own dinner. The child
Speaker 1: should remove the trust for his own survival. But on
Speaker 1: a bigger level, this is a terrible situation, because a
Speaker 1: child should have a mother. When she says she'll make dinner,
Speaker 1: the child knows he'll get dinner. Exact same thing happens
Speaker 1: with citizens in their institutions. I want you to know
Speaker 1: that none of this is normal, and none of this
Speaker 1: is okay. You should have a medical establishment. You can trust,
Speaker 1: you don't, and so you shouldn't trust them, but you don't.
Speaker 1: And that Look, we'll focus on medical because that's what
Speaker 1: we were talking about, doctor Witch. Here, let me be
Speaker 1: honest with you about something in my own life, totally
Speaker 1: honest with you. Why do I talk so much about
Speaker 1: natural things now, natural solutions, naturalness. You've heard me rant
Speaker 1: about big pharma. You've heard me rant about the medical establishment. Why, well,
Speaker 1: they have violated my trust and now I have to
Speaker 1: look elsewhere. Now do you want to know why? Do
Speaker 1: you want to know the real reason why? I mean,
Speaker 1: I've told you real reasons before, But why is it?
Speaker 1: What chalk is a great example. Why do I love
Speaker 1: chalk so much? Well, the way I look at Chok
Speaker 1: Chok's natural herbal supplements. Obviously, the way I look at
Speaker 1: chalk is chalk keeps me away from the doctor. That
Speaker 1: is my goal. And you know what I hate that.
Speaker 1: I actually wish I had a medical establishment that I
Speaker 1: trusted for everything, a doctor I trusted so much. Every month,
Speaker 1: every two months, I go check in with the doc. Doc,
Speaker 1: this is what's going on, this and that. But now
Speaker 1: don't don't have any of that at all. I Well,
Speaker 1: you know what I take. I take a male vitality
Speaker 1: stack from chalk every day. I take that not only
Speaker 1: because it makes me feel better, because I feel like
Speaker 1: I'm preventing myself from ever having to go to the doctor.
Speaker 1: I check in with the doctor's office when I want
Speaker 1: blood work done, and then not at all because I
Speaker 1: have taken my trust away and I don't celebrate that.
Speaker 1: I do celebrate chalk, and I thank them for it,
Speaker 1: but that's not what I want. I would like to
Speaker 1: have chalk and a doctor. Now I just have chalk.
Speaker 5: Sucks.
Speaker 1: By the way, do try a stack from chalk. You
Speaker 1: will be amazed at how you feel. Choq dot com
Speaker 1: remember promo, Go Jesse, go try it for a few
Speaker 1: months and see how you feel. But that's not the
Speaker 1: point of our conversation here. The point is I want
Speaker 1: you to have that. I want me to have that.
Speaker 1: The FBI another great example. Look, you've got guys Cash, Betel,
Speaker 1: Dan Bong. You know people, you know people we've talked about,
Speaker 1: people we've celebrated. They're out there talking on the news
Speaker 1: and talking about this, and they want to do this
Speaker 1: and they want to accomplish that. And we're gonna well
Speaker 1: for instance, Dan Bongino went on Fox News this morning
Speaker 1: said this.
Speaker 8: There was a room and we found stuff, a lot
Speaker 8: of stuff hidden room. I wouldn't call it hidden, but
Speaker 8: hidden from us at least and not mentioned to us.
Speaker 8: And a lot of it's from the Komi era. And
Speaker 8: we are working our damn this right now to declassifying.
Speaker 8: Just so you know, because I get the public, I
Speaker 8: totally understand people saying we'll do it now. The process
Speaker 8: is not. All the information is ours to classify some
Speaker 8: as other intelligence agencies, it's not. We literally can't do it.
Speaker 8: Once that gets done and that gets out there and
Speaker 8: you read some of the stuff we found that, by
Speaker 8: the way, was not processed through the normal procedure digitizing it,
Speaker 8: putting in FBI records. We found it in bags hiding
Speaker 8: under Jim call. Yeah, you're going to be stuff.
Speaker 1: How can you trust an organization that does things like that?
Speaker 1: The Federal Bureau of Investigation troves of information that they
Speaker 1: socked the way in a room to hide it from
Speaker 1: the new director and deputy director. How do you you
Speaker 1: can't trust an organization like that. It doesn't matter who's
Speaker 1: in charge of it, who the new director is, who
Speaker 1: the new deputy director is to me, Frank, I think
Speaker 1: they both have an impossible task. I've told Dan in
Speaker 1: case you're wondering, I've told Dan that myself. But I
Speaker 1: don't think I'm just saying it to you. I've told
Speaker 1: him I don't think he can do what he wants
Speaker 1: to do, reform the FBI, fixed the FBI. I don't
Speaker 1: believe it can be done, and not only just because
Speaker 1: of the poison inside of the building. By the way,
Speaker 1: why haven't the whistleblower has been brought back. That's a
Speaker 1: whole other story entirely, not just because of the poison
Speaker 1: inside of the building. I don't think you could do
Speaker 1: it because the public has already left. Remember was the
Speaker 1: last time we brought up a public poll. I don't
Speaker 1: remember the last time it was about the public's view
Speaker 1: of the FBI. You lost him. Now it wasn't obviously
Speaker 1: Cash and Dan. It lost them, but the FBI as
Speaker 1: an organization gone completely gone. Elections are another great example.
Speaker 1: It's really really important for you and me to live
Speaker 1: in a country where you can trust elections, that they're honest,
Speaker 1: that they're on the up and up, that every vote
Speaker 1: will be counted. Twenty twenty that went away, And it
Speaker 1: doesn't matter how many Democrats you send to the news
Speaker 1: to say it was the freest and fairest election ever.
Speaker 1: All that does now is cement in people's minds that
Speaker 1: you did something dirty. That's all that does now. Now
Speaker 1: that you've lost that trust, where are we puts us
Speaker 1: in a terrible place as a country, just like the
Speaker 1: kid whose mom didn't make dinner. All right, we're moving
Speaker 1: off for that. I won't talk about it anymore. I'm
Speaker 1: going to talk to Brandon Wikert.
Speaker 5: I want to know.
Speaker 1: Why Donald Trump is upset with Vladimir Putin now vocally
Speaker 1: he nor really doesn't do that blast away vocally. I
Speaker 1: want to know why Trump is upset with Benjamin Nett
Speaker 1: and Yahoo vocally said something today about it. We played
Speaker 1: it for you earlier. What's going on to Brandon next?
Speaker 1: It is the Jesse Kelly Show, and I want to
Speaker 1: know what's going on with this whole Putin Ukraine Roughshia
Speaker 1: stuff and why Trump is scolding Benjamin Nett and Yahoo. Basically,
Speaker 1: I want to know why we're hearing things like this
Speaker 1: every day.
Speaker 7: I can't tell you that, but I'll let you know
Speaker 7: in about two weeks, within two weeks, we're going to
Speaker 7: find out very soon, we're going to find out whether
Speaker 7: or not he's tapping us along or not, and if
Speaker 7: he is, we'll respond a little bit differently, but it'll
Speaker 7: take about a week and a half. Two weeks.
Speaker 1: He's talking about Putin and Ukraine and whatnot. So let's
Speaker 1: ask Brandon about that. Joining me now, Brandon Weikert, author
Speaker 1: of so many books national security expert, including his book
Speaker 1: Shadow War about Iran, which I really love. Brandon, Okay,
Speaker 1: let's start in Russia Ukraine. Obviously we all know Trump
Speaker 1: wants to end the whole thing. He's now vocally scolded
Speaker 1: Putin a couple of times. What's happening over there?
Speaker 5: Well, I think everybody needs to remember, as fun as
Speaker 5: it would be to say Putin is a mustache twirling villain,
Speaker 5: he is responding Putin is to an assassination attempt. Somebody
Speaker 5: tried to whack him. The Ukrainians are saying that, note
Speaker 5: it wasn't us, But I suspect what happened was somebody
Speaker 5: in our intel services thought they had a beat on
Speaker 5: Putin's helicopter. We know that our intel people have been
Speaker 5: helping since at least twenty twenty three serving as targeting
Speaker 5: analysts for the Ukrainians when they were firing these long
Speaker 5: range missiles into Russia. We were helping them target so
Speaker 5: that they'd be more precise. We also know that the
Speaker 5: intel community has for the last two years claimed they
Speaker 5: know where Putin is at all times and they can
Speaker 5: take him out whenever they want, if it ever came
Speaker 5: to that. Well, I think that this was not actually
Speaker 5: Ukraine they pulled the trigger, But I think this was
Speaker 5: as an assassination attempt against Putin by a rogue element
Speaker 5: within our intelligence community. And I say that because Trump
Speaker 5: he came out on Monday, I think it was Monday
Speaker 5: or Tuesday, and he was scolding Putin as you as
Speaker 5: you noted. But then yesterday he came out and gave
Speaker 5: a brief statement in which he said, I was just
Speaker 5: told about an assassination attempt, and maybe that's why Putin
Speaker 5: is behaving the way he has been. Well, in my opinion,
Speaker 5: why wasn't Trump, or my question is, why wasn't Trump
Speaker 5: briefed immediately about this potential assassination attempt? And I think
Speaker 5: that's to tell that there was a rogue element going
Speaker 5: you know, trying to manipulate things by getting rid of
Speaker 5: Putin in the middle of this a very important negotiation.
Speaker 5: They don't want negotiations, Jesse, they want war.
Speaker 1: Okay, So a couple big fat questions I have from
Speaker 1: that one. You said we were helping the Ukrainians with
Speaker 1: their long term targeting, including targets inside of Russian territory.
Speaker 1: Are we still doing that, that's the first question.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I would assume so, given the relationship that's been
Speaker 5: built up between our intelligence services and the Ukrainians, I
Speaker 5: know that the Ukrainians are not able to effectively. They
Speaker 5: have the weapons we gave them, the long range weapons,
Speaker 5: but they're not very good at these long range targeting,
Speaker 5: and the NATO intelligence services, including our intelligence services, have
Speaker 5: been acting as targeting analysts for them. So I would
Speaker 5: assume that's still going on. But I believe it's still
Speaker 5: going on. Yes, I know it was going on during
Speaker 5: the Biden regime though.
Speaker 1: Okay, Now that actually leads me to this question, how
Speaker 1: do you long range target these things in whatever way
Speaker 1: you're allowed to tell us? Why are they bad at
Speaker 1: it and we're good at it? What is this space satellites?
Speaker 1: People don't know how this stuff works. How's it working?
Speaker 5: It's mostly Our space surveillance capability is really I wrote
Speaker 5: a whole book on this, it's called Winning Space. Our
Speaker 5: space surveillance capability is light years if you're part in
Speaker 5: the pond, the dad joke is light years beyond what
Speaker 5: a country like Ukraine has. It's actually probably light years
Speaker 5: beyond what any other country except maybe China's catching up
Speaker 5: to us. Even Russia, which has an impressive space capability
Speaker 5: as well, it doesn't come close to our surveillance capacity.
Speaker 5: And so I believe that that's why we were being
Speaker 5: used for targeting assistance.
Speaker 1: Why is our surveillance capacity so much better than every
Speaker 1: other country? Does this just come down to money in volume?
Speaker 1: We have enough money to put more satellites up there
Speaker 1: than anyone else does. Is that what it is?
Speaker 5: That's part of it. In the middle there was a
Speaker 5: gap after the Cold War. The Russians were kind of
Speaker 5: cut off at their knees for a period of time,
Speaker 5: and we were kind of the only show in town
Speaker 5: when it came to space, and so that gave us
Speaker 5: a lot of ability to kind of get a lead
Speaker 5: on the rest of the world. Of course, as an aside,
Speaker 5: those surveillance systems. While they're essential for US, they're also
Speaker 5: very easy to take out with anti satellite weapons, which
Speaker 5: is what China and Russia have been developing for the
Speaker 5: last fifteen years, very effective capabilities to render US deaf, dumb,
Speaker 5: and blind in space. But until that happens, we still
Speaker 5: have the lead with these surveillance and communication capabilities.
Speaker 1: Okay, so when it comes to Russia Ukraine, why don't
Speaker 1: we just leave? Can we just leave? If that's what
Speaker 1: Donald Trump wants to do. I realize he's trying to
Speaker 1: brokerr a deal and be a peacemaker, and I actually
Speaker 1: applaud all that that's great. But if at some point
Speaker 1: in time he gets frustrated, Putin doesn't want to end it,
Speaker 1: Zelenski doesn't want to end it. Donald Trump is the president.
Speaker 1: Can he not say, hey, Cia, military, everybody pack up
Speaker 1: your things. We're going home.
Speaker 5: Well, so this is basically my inaugural piece at the
Speaker 5: American Conservative was published two days ago, and it was
Speaker 5: exactly about this. Donald Trump's going to walk away from Ukraine.
Speaker 5: And there's no doubt in my mind that whatever, whatever
Speaker 5: you know, he's angry at Putin, he's not angry at Putin.
Speaker 5: You know, it's different every day, and it's part of
Speaker 5: the kind of the Trump show. You know, he's got
Speaker 5: to put on the show, like, yeah, he's holding Putin
Speaker 5: to the fire. But ultimately, Trump bottom line, wants to
Speaker 5: get a better working relationship with Russia. He rightly recognizes
Speaker 5: that Russia is a much more integral player deal politically
Speaker 5: than Ukraine will ever be, and so he is going
Speaker 5: to go do the negotiation show for a little bit.
Speaker 5: He knows he's gotten a losing hand. He's going to
Speaker 5: eventually drop Ukraine like a hot potato. Tell the Europeans
Speaker 5: tag you're it, don't include us anymore. That he's going
Speaker 5: to pivot and try to do direct deals with the
Speaker 5: Russians on a coterie of other more important issues, ranging
Speaker 5: from rare earth mineral development in Russia to Putin. A
Speaker 5: few weeks ago, positive that Elon Muskin him are talking
Speaker 5: about doing a joint American Russian manned program to Mars
Speaker 5: in the next year or two. That's something they're wanting
Speaker 5: to try, maybe doing together Russia in SpaceX. So you know,
Speaker 5: we're moving beyond Ukraine. I think you're right. I think
Speaker 5: that Trump will ultimately just drop Ukraine and tag you're
Speaker 5: at Europe.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm right a lot. Chris is used to that
Speaker 1: around here. What Chris, what? It's just Brandon and I talking.
Speaker 1: Don't get involved, Okay, So not to get too sidetracked.
Speaker 1: I swell, I'm going to get to Iran and net
Speaker 1: and Yaku in a moment. But where does China come
Speaker 1: into play there? Because I know Russia and China have
Speaker 1: been getting I know, their competitors in a lot of ways,
Speaker 1: but they've been getting closer in recent years, almost out
Speaker 1: of necessity for both those countries as other parts of
Speaker 1: the world are cutting them off. If we start getting
Speaker 1: more friendly with Russia, where does that leave China.
Speaker 5: Well, that would technically, you would think you would leave
Speaker 5: them in the odd man out position. And I think
Speaker 5: that's what Trump and his people around him, the ones
Speaker 5: that know what's going on, I think that that's the hope,
Speaker 5: that's the ambition, is to overtime divorce Russia and China
Speaker 5: from each other by favoring Russia over China. This is
Speaker 5: what Nixon did in reverse during the Cold War, and
Speaker 5: it ended up actually setting the table that allowed for
Speaker 5: Reagan to ultimately defeat the Communists. The Soviet Union without
Speaker 5: fire or shop. Whether that's possible, it's a little bit
Speaker 5: different now, I don't know, but I do think at
Speaker 5: the very least, we can nudge Russia away from its
Speaker 5: total commitment to China. Ultimately, Russia is aware, they're keenly
Speaker 5: aware that China views them as a junior partner. And
Speaker 5: I can assure you that Vladimir Putin does not view
Speaker 5: himself as a junior partner to anybody, and at some
Speaker 5: point he's not going to want to be treated that way,
Speaker 5: either certainly publicly or even behind closed doors. Eventually, the
Speaker 5: limits to that supposedly limitless friendship he has with g
Speaker 5: will be tested, especially as Trump offers a lot of
Speaker 5: you know, tasty carrots, you know, come work with us instead.
Speaker 5: We're still a much better market than his China, and
Speaker 5: I think that Putin is looking for a better deal.
Speaker 5: We just got to be willing to offer.
Speaker 1: Him at Yeah, limitless friends are hard to come by. Okay, Brandon,
Speaker 1: can you stay and just answer a couple more questions
Speaker 1: about Trump and net and Yahoo? Just sure, real quick? Okay,
Speaker 1: we will be right back with more Brandon Weikert. Before
Speaker 1: we come back with more Brandon wikert. I want to
Speaker 1: remind you that tonight might be the night you lose
Speaker 1: all your family pictures, all those home videos. Think about
Speaker 1: that drawer you have with all the home videos, the
Speaker 1: family vacation, the wedding. Tonight might be the night that
Speaker 1: goes bye bye, one flood, one fire, little wire that's wrong,
Speaker 1: it's going hey wire in your attic right now, and
Speaker 1: that wedding album is gone. Doesn't have to be that way.
Speaker 1: It doesn't have to be that way. You can digitize
Speaker 1: all those things with Legacy Box. They'll send them all
Speaker 1: back to you. They'll send you a box. You put
Speaker 1: them in a box, You send it to Legacy Box,
Speaker 1: an American company, You send it to Tennessee. It's not
Speaker 1: some big machine. They will hand digitize your stuff, send
Speaker 1: it all back and then fireflood time, nothing will destroy
Speaker 1: those memories. Sound like a plan. You want a nice
Speaker 1: deal on it, Go to legacybox dot com slash Jesse
Speaker 1: for an exclusive offer. Legacy box dot com slash Jesse,
Speaker 1: We'll be back. Is the Jesse Kelly Show a fantastic Thursday,
Speaker 1: reminding you that tomorrow's ask doctor Jesse Friday. You need
Speaker 1: to get your question estions emailed in now to Jesse
Speaker 1: at Jesse kellyshow dot com. We are back with Brandon Wikert,
Speaker 1: national security expert. You need to go buy his books
Speaker 1: and you'll learn a lot more than you will in school. Okay, Brandon.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump is famously close with Israel. As you and
Speaker 1: I've talked about this before. We've talked about it on
Speaker 1: the air before. This is as vocal as I've ever
Speaker 1: heard him separate from them when it comes to Iran.
Speaker 1: He's talking about net and Yaku. He told him to
Speaker 1: back off. He told what's going on here? What does
Speaker 1: Trump want out of this deal?
Speaker 5: Well, what Trump is trying to do is he's trying
Speaker 5: to get to see this is not even He's just
Speaker 5: trying to see if it's possible to get a real
Speaker 5: reliable deal with Iran that secures not only the peace,
Speaker 5: but our security by extension, by the way, the security
Speaker 5: of our allies in the region, not just Israel, but
Speaker 5: it includes Israel as but also the Arab States as well,
Speaker 5: who are also threatened by a nuclearizing Iran. But he
Speaker 5: can't do that. If Iran is blowing up the place
Speaker 5: or threatening to blow up the place, I'm sorry Israel.
Speaker 5: If Israel is threatening to blow up the place, which
Speaker 5: Israel threatening to do. And so you know, Trump has
Speaker 5: asked politely net Yahu, you know, just keep your powder dry.
Speaker 5: Let's just see where the negotiations going after that will reassess.
Speaker 5: But net Nyahu cannot do that. And I think this
Speaker 5: is partly because Netanyahu is politically his survival is on
Speaker 5: the line. Let's face it, he missed key indicators and
Speaker 5: warnings as Prime minister of the impending Hamas attack on
Speaker 5: ten to seven. He knows that at some point the
Speaker 5: Israeli Parliament, thaness and Israeli security is going to do
Speaker 5: an after action, a thorough after action report, and eventually
Speaker 5: he will be blamed on some level, because the buck
Speaker 5: ultimately stops with him. He will be blamed for those
Speaker 5: failures on that day, and he likely will lose his
Speaker 5: next his political future. Furthermore, he was under all these
Speaker 5: criminal investigations before ten seven, and all that sort of
Speaker 5: evaporated into the ether when he became a wartime prime minister.
Speaker 5: And this is why I think on some levels, cynically
Speaker 5: he's opened up multiple fronts against these different countries, saying
Speaker 5: it's part of the ten to seven response, but really
Speaker 5: I think it was because he was just trying to
Speaker 5: double down to prevent the ultimate reckoning that he was
Speaker 5: going to have to face four mistakes he made as
Speaker 5: Prime minister. So some of this is self interest on
Speaker 5: his part, but ultimately he is not interested in seeing
Speaker 5: the Trump administration even try to negotiate. We don't know
Speaker 5: if this is going to work out. I'm skeptical because
Speaker 5: of how the Iranian regime is, but at the same time,
Speaker 5: Trump is probably the greatest dealmaker in history. So why
Speaker 5: don't we let the man work and see what happens,
Speaker 5: you know, before we just write it off. There's absolutely
Speaker 5: no reason to rush into what will be another regional
Speaker 5: war that could trigger a third World War in the
Speaker 5: Middle East.
Speaker 1: Brandon, you mentioned October seventh, and I have many friends
Speaker 1: in Israel and outside of it who, when you know,
Speaker 1: when we have discussions about it, they have a lot
Speaker 1: of questions about that day, not necessarily accusations, but there
Speaker 1: are people who want to understand how it's possible, maybe
Speaker 1: the most capable intelligence network on the planet, given its size, Israel's,
Speaker 1: how you could miss a thousand person raid with paragliders
Speaker 1: into your country. So without being King Sinek Jesse. How's
Speaker 1: that possible.
Speaker 5: Well, you know, the sort of non conspiratorial answer is
Speaker 5: they got complacent, and we know that the Israelis when
Speaker 5: it came to Hamas not necessarily has blow, which Israel's
Speaker 5: always taken more seriously and they should because it's a
Speaker 5: more comprehensive threat. But when it came to Hamas, particularly
Speaker 5: under Netanyahu, there was the policy they nicknamed it mowing
Speaker 5: the grass, which is basically, every so often the Israelis
Speaker 5: would come in and sort of knock out a handful
Speaker 5: of targets in the Gaza strip and sort of keep
Speaker 5: the As threat under wraps. What people didn't realize is
Speaker 5: under the table the Israeli government, Netanyahu's government, was quietly
Speaker 5: paying off Hamas to basically not attack, to keep things
Speaker 5: quiet as best as possible, so that Netanyahu could have
Speaker 5: a kind of clear playing field at home in Israel.
Speaker 5: But what nobody seemed to realize is that they thought
Speaker 5: they were buying loyalty from these Maas leaders, or at
Speaker 5: least buying their cooperation. In fact, those Hamas leaders who
Speaker 5: are committed to the destruction of Israel were taking that
Speaker 5: money and using it to rebuild their war machine that
Speaker 5: we saw come on display on ten to seven. On
Speaker 5: some level, the Israeli military, the Israeli intelligence services were
Speaker 5: both complacent about the threat from Hamas, and they were
Speaker 5: very arrogant. They didn't actually think Hamas was the real threat.
Speaker 5: They thought Hesbla, they thought Youron. They didn't think Hamas
Speaker 5: was significant of a threat. They were proven wrong. And
Speaker 5: I think you saw that. There's obviously more conspiratorial things
Speaker 5: stand down orders for instance, And why wasn't net Yahoo
Speaker 5: more on this given the size of the attack, et cetera,
Speaker 5: et cetera. I will leave that to you know, a
Speaker 5: different day to talk about, but I certainly have theories
Speaker 5: on that. But basically, I do think a key component
Speaker 5: of this was complacency plus arrogance about the Hamas threat
Speaker 5: on the part of the Israeli security services. There's also
Speaker 5: a chance, given what we know about what was going
Speaker 5: on with Netanya, who's legal issues. You know, the same
Speaker 5: kind of lawfare used against Donald Trump last year was
Speaker 5: used against Netan Yahoo by the Israeli version of the FBI,
Speaker 5: the shin Bet. There is a chance that they didn't
Speaker 5: brief Netan Yahoo fully on the threat and he didn't
Speaker 5: take action because he wasn't brief fully, and it might
Speaker 5: have been part of a kind of a deep state
Speaker 5: conspiracy to make met Yahoo complacent so that they could
Speaker 5: then tend this on him down the line and get
Speaker 5: him out, because we know the Israeli deep state does
Speaker 5: not like nets in Yahoo.
Speaker 1: Wow. I glad to see we're not the only ones
Speaker 1: with these problems.
Speaker 5: He is.
Speaker 1: Brandon Wiker, Thank you, my friend, as always for giving
Speaker 1: us a bit of your time and wisdom again today,
Speaker 1: come back soon. Appreciate you very much. Foreign policy is
Speaker 1: a complicated affair, isn't it. Well, that's why we always
Speaker 1: talk about that. It's so complicated, different motivations, different divisions
Speaker 1: inside of the country. You're trying to strike a deal,
Speaker 1: but there's divisions inside of that country, but you're not
Speaker 1: also working with a different country. It's just foreign policy
Speaker 1: is complicated. As I've always said, with the exception of
Speaker 1: chicken hawks, I have open ears for all of it.
Speaker 1: I'll listen to any of it.
Speaker 4: This has been a podcast from wor