Shownotes Transcript
Come see us on tour in Los Angeles, Bakersfield, San Jose, Buffalo, Toledo, Montreal, and Toronto. Go to JimmyDore.com for the cheapest tickets. This is the Jimmy Dore Show. Aaron Maté speaking. Who's this? Hello, Aaron. This is former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. A pleasure to make your acquaintance. But I must say I'm surprised to hear your voice and not Jimmy's. Jimmy's not here. I'm filling in this week.
Oh, no, what happened? Did he die from hitting his head on the pavement after falling backwards off a curb and losing his balance after being accidentally hit by a drunk Lithuanian woman on an electric scooter? Oh, no, that's what happened, isn't it? I'm afraid I saw that coming. Very sad, though. No, Jimmy's fine. He's just on the road doing shows. Oh, I was way off. Way off.
And so glad that I was, too. Please give our still-breathing friend my warmest regards. I will. So I understand your mayoral campaign is doing well.
Aaron, it's going gangbusters. Thanks for asking, young man. We are leading in the polls, building a coalition, and overall just harnessing that big apple energy that you can't find anywhere else, and only a native son like yours truly can properly channel into electoral success. I see. I also see that you have already taken some swipes at your opponents.
Aaron, this is New York City politics. This is the home of Tammany Hall. The mayor's race is not going to be a pillow fight at a middle school girl sleepover as much as I would like to watch that. Okay.
How are these people aiding anti-Semitism exactly?
Because they're a member of the DSA, or Democratic Socialists of America, a far-left extremist political movement. And let me tell you, these are some real clowns, Aaron. New York wants none of their monkey business. Their platform may as well have been written by Hamas themselves. Because they oppose aid to Israel?
And that's not anti-Semitic? No, it's not. Considering our aid is currently being used to fund a genocide, I'd call it a humanitarian position. Aaron, there is nothing humanitarian about aiding and abetting the world's oldest evil, its most tragic and irrational hatred, the horrid specter that is anti-Semitism. And my opponents should know that, especially the one with the fucking Muslim name. You mean Zoran Mamdani?
Yeah, whatever. Good luck to that guy finding donors in this city. Put it that way. One of your opponents that you accuse is himself Jewish. So? Don't you, as someone who is not Jewish, feel sort of strange calling a Jewish person anti-Semitic? Doesn't that give you pause? No, because the money Jews love it. And then they give me money. Okay, I think using the term money Jews is way more anti-Semitic than anything else here.
Well, then what else do you call them? Besides, if you're pro-Israel to the point of being pro-genocide, you can get away with all sorts of stuff like that. Once you're one of the good ones, they give you a wide berth. I'm an anti-Zionist Jew. Does that make me anti-Semitic?
I don't understand what you're not getting here. Yes. And I know I'm not the first Gentile who has said that to you. Look, I'm trying to win the mayor's race in New York City. I got to thin the herd. These DSA bozos have no chance, so let's get them out early so we don't have to listen to them prattle on. And the best way to do that is accuse them of the only inexcusable crime in this town. So this is just cynical political stuff then.
Yes and no. Pragmatic. That's the word I'd use for what I'm doing. I'm a pragmatist. And I'm a proud Italian-American. What does that have to do with anything? I'm sorry. Never mind that last part. That's just instinct. You see, when I'm defending myself, it's usually about the sexual misconduct stuff. It just came out. I see.
What I meant to say is I'm a proud spiritual son of Israel. And all true New Yorkers feel the same way and are going to vote for whatever old school Italian guy says it loudest. And quite frankly, young man, I can't understand how you can be Jewish and feel that and don't feel the same way. By simply understanding the history of Israel since 1948?
My, how anti-Semitic of you. See how easy this is? Just avoid any sensible reckoning of what's going on over there now. Talk in circles, say nothing. That's why I'm a politician and you're not. And I'm proud that's the case. Look, we have to get the show started. Any final comments?
Yes, to all my Jewish friends listening, especially voters in the five boroughs, I will always have the back of Israel. And to whatever extent the office of New York mayor supports other nations, I will do that. And to the lady in the red dress who was at table seven at Luigi's Trattoria in Midtown last night, call me. Call my office.
You could do much better than that little wussy guy you were with. Call my office if you want to dance with a ball. Okay. Shalom and arrivederci.
Medium speeds and jumps to medium and hits them head on. It's the Jimmy Dore Show. Come see us on tour in Los Angeles, Bakersfield, San Jose, Buffalo, Toledo, Montreal, and Toronto. Go to JimmyDore.com for the cheapest tickets. Here's the headline in the Washington Post. Bill Ackman, hedge fund billionaire and key Trump ally, slams tariffs. The Wall Street mogul warned of economic nuclear winter.
as the threat of an all-out trade war triggers a global market meltdown. Bill Ackman is one of many wealthy Trump allies, Trump boosters, who are now speaking out against Trump's tariffs, which they say are going to tank the economy. Bill Ackman, a hedge fund billionaire who endorsed Donald Trump's 2024 candidacy, warned in apocalyptic terms over the weekend that the president's sweeping tariff plan
if implemented as planned, would cause irreparable damage to the U.S. economy. The U.S. is heading for a self-induced economic nuclear winter, and we should start hunkering down, Ackman wrote.
Elon Musk posted a video of the late Nobel Prize winning economist Milton Friedman explaining why he believed international economic cooperation by way of the free market benefits consumers. Musk said earlier he hoped the U.S. and Europe would move to a zero tariff situation. So for Musk and Ackman to come out and say this, that's a sharp turn because these are obviously some of Trump's biggest allies to the point where Bill Ackman just a few months ago was saying this about Donald Trump.
STEPPING INTO, I WOULD SAY, THE MOST PRO-GROWTH, PRO-BUSINESS, PRO-AMERICAN ADMINISTRATION I'VE PERHAPS SEEN IN MY ADULT LIFETIME, CERTAINLY. WE JUST HAD A NICE LITTLE CEREMONY AND, YOU KNOW, CEOs OF BROAD RAY OF, YOU KNOW, BIG AMERICAN COMPANIES, AND I WOULD SAY EVERYONE IS INCREDIBLY ENTHUSIASTIC, REALLY ABOUT A NEW ADMINISTRATION THAT'S ABOUT EFFICIENCY, REMOVING THE IMPEDIMENTS TO GROWTH, DEREGULATION.
So from, you know, we're really excited. This is great too. This is nuclear winter. That's a threat from Bill Ackman. Yeah, well, that's the thing. Bill Ackman's word, what's that good for, honestly? Like, I honestly, Trump, all these other betrayals, I like to see Wall Street being betrayed, and I actually don't care if it hurts me if I can see it hurt them. Is that a bad place to be? That's where I am. A lot of people feel that way. A lot of people feel that way. That's the problem. It's like when you have people like Bill Ackman,
who's not only a hedge fund billionaire, but someone who cheers on the censorship of voices critical of Israel. It's hard to take his side. And if he's feeling gloomy about things, then maybe that could be a positive sign for the country. He's not just that scumbag, too. Don't forget the drug prices that are jacked all the way up. He's worse than Pharma Bro was that everybody hated. He's way worse on that. Right, right, right. Here's another Trump ally, Maria Bartiromo.
saying we could be headed for a recession. - They have an effect on Main Street. Some things will become higher priced. We will see some products actually be raised in price because companies will pass on the cost of tariffs to consumers.
I would expect that. That's why you have some people saying that we could see a recession, we'll see a growth slowdown. This morning, Nancy Lazar, who I follow very closely and I think she's terrific, from Piper Sandler, she says, if the tariffs stay in place for at least the next six months,
Even if only 50% of the price shocks where we're seeing products go higher in price show through the economy, U.S. real GDP is on track to decline about 1% in the second quarter and in the third quarter with unemployment rising. That's one of Trump's biggest cheerleaders saying this could lead to a recession. Well, I don't care about none of his cheerleaders. I like them to be unhappy. This is what I'm saying. Like, they're...
Everybody I know, in fact, all of New York, I would say, except for like Dave Smith and I don't know if you live there, but they're all the dumbest people and they're wrong about every single thing they say. So I have a hard time as someone who doesn't really understand the market at all. Not me either. Because weren't we headed for this Armageddon anyway? What's our date?
which was going to be passed on to us continually. So I like seeing Bill Ackman not like it and Maria Bartiromo not like it. I really like, it's something that's going to harm globalism in a big way. And I'll bet you'd be surprised how many MAGA people would be fine with that.
Here is Jamie Dimon, CEO of J.P. Morgan. He says the Trump tariff will boost inflation slow and slow and already weakening economy. That's him now. But listen to him back just a few months ago talking about not only why he supports Trump, but why he's fine with tariffs.
That's it. They're an economic weapon, you know, depending how you use it and why you use it and stuff like that. And, you know, people argue, is it inflationary and non-inflationary? I would put in perspective, if it's a little inflationary, but it's good for national security, so be it. I mean, get over it. National security trumps a little bit more inflation. So get over it. That was him just recently. Now he's saying it's going to cause it. Now he's warning about it. Solid advice.
Dave Portnoy of Barstool Sports, another Trump supporter, he says he's lost a lot of money because of the dip in the stock market, but he's sticking with Trump. I went super viral when I said I lost $7 million. I'd kill to be back to losing $7 million. I haven't even looked. If I had to guess, I'm down in these last three days, probably close to 20. I don't know, like 10%, 15% of my net worth, poof. But I'm still here. That's the game.
That's what I'm in. Like, do I like it? No. Am I crying? Am I like, oh, whoa, it's me. I wish I voted for Kamala. No. Do I wish this didn't go down like this? Yes. Am I in this to make money? Yes. Do I wish I had that money in my back in my investment portfolio? Yes.
So he's lost a lot of money. But again, how relatable is it if people are losing, you know, $20 million, obviously that's just not the situation of, of I'm glad he can take that in stride. Hey, am I down 20 million? Yeah. Oh, wow. I always think of, uh, you know, how Russia was supposed to be weakened by this stupid thing we did. And they're not because all the oligarchs, you know,
You know, because they were banned from being in the world market, weren't they? And so they had to invest in Russia. And it turned out it was good for them. So, you know, like I said, I wouldn't claim to be any authority on it because I don't understand how the market works. But here's something I do understand. Those, I mean, Portnoy, not him, but them other two, those pricks are always touting something that sucks. And then when it is really bad, they're telling you it's good.
Oh, we're about to lose a great economy. What are you talking about? This is like a limping thing that something's got to be done. Now, I don't know if it's this. Like I said, I guess we'll see. But I like to see Wall Street people upset. I really do. I like to see them jumping out of windows if I'm being honest. I like to see infighting as well. And we're getting a lot of that. Here's Peter Navarro, a top Trump advisor on the economy.
taking a swipe at Elon Musk, who is not happy about these tariffs. Back to Elon Musk for a second, because I'm glad that you brought that up. He also took a shot at you personally on X, and he's going against the administration with respect to the tariff policy. The president has said in the coming months he may leave the administration. Peter, is there a rift internally?
NO, I MEAN, LOOK, ELON, LOOK, ELON, WHEN HE'S IN HIS DOGE LANE, IS GREAT. BUT WE UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON HERE. WE JUST HAVE TO UNDERSTAND. ELON SELLS CARS. AND HE'S IN TEXAS ASSEMBLING CARS.
I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA. I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA. HE'S NOT PROTECTING HIS OWN INTEREST. THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE BIG PARTS OF THAT CAR FROM MEXICO, CHINA, THE BATTERIES COME FROM JAPAN OR CHINA, THE ELECTRONICS COME FROM TAIWAN, AND HE'S SIMPLY PROTECTING HIS OWN INTEREST AS ANY BUSINESS PERSON WOULD DO. WE'RE MORE CONCERNED ABOUT DETROIT BUILDING CATALAX WITH
I like that he admits that Elon Musk has a massive conflict of interest, like being a top government advisor while also having a stake in certain policies that benefit his profits. I mean, that's refreshing to hear that admission from a Trump. But I thought Elon controlled Donald Trump. I thought he was in charge. He was the head oligarch. Do not watch Breaking Points, though. Well, obviously, there's a rift there, despite what Peter Navarro says. Here's Rand Paul. Go ahead. Go ahead.
It's not quite a soothing balm for all that Israel shit, but it cools the burn a little bit.
Here is Rand Paul, also not a fan of the terrorists. I am a supporter of Donald Trump, but this is a bipartisan problem. I don't care if the president is a Republican or a Democrat. I don't want to live under emergency rule. I don't want to live where my representatives cannot speak for me and have a check and balance on power. One person can make a mistake.
And guess what? Tariffs are a terrible mistake. They don't work, they will lead to higher prices, they are a tax, and they have historically been bad for our economy. But even if this were something that was magic and was going to be a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, I wouldn't want to live under emergency rule. I would want to live in a constitutional republic where there are checks and balances against the excesses of both sides, right or left.
We don't have that now, uh, brands. I don't know if you notice. Uh, I love the, I love the here, the Fauci hearings. There are a lot of laughs. They don't do nothing. So I don't know. I'm all like, are all these people not aware of where things are at right now? Like they seem like they're not. Here's Donald Trump's message to his haters. The U S has a chance to do something we should have done decades ago. Don't be weak. Don't be stupid. Don't be a panic in.
A new party based on weak and stupid people. That's what Panikin is. He wrote that himself for sure. Panikin. That's the latest one from Trump. Be strong, courageous, and patient, and greatness will be the result. A new party based on weak and stupid people.
Oh, hilarious. Well, look, I saw Rand Paul. It's like when guys all agree with and I'll watch him go like, why should we have to pay those soldiers that have that burn pit illness? Yeah, exactly. And I'm like, and then that's where the libertarian part of it where you're like the flaws in it kind of come out. Yeah.
I don't understand why the tariffs are working. Now, I just got done watching the great Ben Shapiro trying to explain. He goes, well, how come other countries do it to us? And he mentioned how a lot of poor countries do it and they're poor. But do other countries have tariffs on us, even the ones from the charter not accurate? Like Europe, are they putting tariffs on it? Why is it working for them? That's maybe a dumb question.
They definitely have tariffs on the U.S. And I think and that's that's the hope for people who want Trump to remove the tariffs, that they're hoping that his position will force other countries to remove their tariffs enough to get Trump to back down. But so far, Trump is not even open to that, according to at least his public statements.
Well, they better get on his good side quick before the nuclear wind. What did the great Bill Ackman say? Nuclear winter? Nuclear winter, yeah. You know, when they say that, it's like a bunch of people just live like that already for quite some time now. What it tells me is it might be bad for them, you know? Not that it will improve life for me. And I'm fine. I'm okay. I can live. I'm getting a real commie spot where I just want to be unhappy.
And I don't care if I'm unhappy. Is that bad? That's where I'm at. Well, we'll see where this continues to go. But for now, Trump is not backing down, even though some even though some of his top allies are increasingly speaking out. So we'll see where this goes. Hey, free speech is under attack, but Rumble refuses to back down. We've always believed in empowering voices, no matter how unpopular. And now we're taking that fight to the next level.
When major advertisers conspired to pull their dollars, even brands like Dunkin' Donuts turned their backs, claiming Rumble had a right-wing culture. But we're not here to fit a mold. We're here to defend free expression. To strengthen this mission, we're excited to offer Rumble Premium, a completely ad-free experience with exclusive benefits for viewers and creators.
You'll find exclusive content from creators like Russell Brand, Dr. Disrespect, Tim Cast, and The Mug Club with Crowder. It's more than just a subscription. It's a stand for free speech. Your voice matters. Join Rumble Premium. For a limited time, you can get $10 off an annual plan using promo DOOR10. Visit Rumble today. Go visit rumble.com slash premium slash DOOR10.
and claim your discount today. Together, we can turn the tide, whether you join Rumble Premium or simply keep watching. Your support helps keep free speech alive. Come see us on tour in Los Angeles, Bakersfield, San Jose, Buffalo, Toledo, Montreal, and Toronto. Go to JimmyDore.com for the cheapest tickets.
Hey, you know, here's another great way you can help support the show is you become a premium member. We give you a couple of hours of premium bonus content every week, and it's a great way to help support the show. You can do it by going to JimmyDoreComedy.com, clicking on Join Premium.
It's the most affordable premium program in the business, and it's a great way to help put your thumb back in the eye of the bastards. Thanks for everybody who was already a premium member, and if you haven't, you're missing out. We give you lots of bonus content. Thanks for your support.
I can't tell you how often I hear, oh, I'm a little OCD. I like things neat. That's not OCD. I'm Howie Mandel, and I know this because I have OCD. Actual OCD causes relentless unwanted thoughts. What if I did something terrible and forgot? What if I'm a bad person? Why am I thinking this terrible thing? It makes you question absolutely everything, and you'll do anything to feel better.
OCD is debilitating, but it's also highly treatable with the right kind of therapy. Regular talk therapy doesn't cut it. OCD needs specialized therapy. That's why I want to tell you about NoCD. NoCD is the world's largest virtual therapy provider for OCD. Their licensed therapists provide specialized therapy virtually, and it's covered by insurance for over 155 million Americans.
If you think you might be struggling with OCD, visit nocd.com to schedule a free 15-minute call and learn more. That's nocd.com. Donald Trump at the White House hosting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and making an announcement that the U.S. will be holding direct talks very soon with Iran. Wait, wait, wait. We're having direct talks with Iran and...
They've started. It'll go on Saturday. We have a very big meeting and we'll see what can happen. And I think everybody agrees that doing a deal would be preferable to doing the obvious. And the obvious is not something that I want to be involved with or, frankly, that Israel wants to be involved with if they can avoid it. I beg to differ. Trump.
is wrong to say that Israel does not want to be involved in an attack on Iran. Israel would love an attack on Iran. That's what they've been lobbying. They don't want to do it themselves. Exactly. That is accurate. They don't want to be involved. They want us to do it. Exactly. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. They don't want to do it by themselves, but they would love to be involved in a U.S. strike on Iran because they can't do it without the U.S. That's why they've been lobbying Trump to do it for a very, very long time. Yeah. We're going to see if we can avoid it, but it's getting to be very dangerous territory.
And hopefully those talks will be successful. All right. So that's Trump announcing direct talks with Iran. Do they even have nukes? Do they even have them?
No. And as we covered last week on the Jimmy Dore show, the U.S. intelligence community just put out an assessment saying that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons. They are becoming a nuclear threshold nation, which they're allowed to do because they're allowed to enrich uranium just within certain limits, which they've kept to so far. But the fear of Trump is that they're going to go past those limits. And that's what there is to negotiate about. But
As of right now, according to Trump's own intelligence agencies, Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program. This is what I don't get. They have those missiles that we don't have because we sent our manufacturing out of the country. So I always thought it was smart because I thought they were developing nukes, but they were actually making missiles you can use because they're not nukes. And so is this going to be directly leading to war? Because if they don't have the nukes,
And Trump's like, well, you have to do this. We have to bomb you. That looks that's why BB is all excited over there. He must know they don't have them. And well, it's inevitable. Yeah, well, it depends what kind of deal Trump is pushing for. Is he does he just want to deal with the nuclear issue, which I think Iran did that before they had a deal before. In fact, Trump was asked about this. So let's hear from Trump first.
If you're going to negotiate a new deal with Iran, can you elaborate how it's going to be more effective than the JCPOA? Well, I can't really say that, but I think it'll be different and maybe a lot stronger. But they were so happy when we made that first deal because we did get a lot out. So.
it's a fair question like we already had a deal with iran the jcpoa which trump broke in his first term so are you just going to like renew that deal you broke or are you going to get something else and trump says it's going to be a lot stronger and the question is you know is trump going to ask iran not only to denuclearize but also give up other missiles that act as a deterrent to israel or to cut off it's it cut off ties to hezbollah which is it's
its main ally in the region. That's a whole other story, which I don't think Iran will agree to. That first deal. Now, what I thought was there was some background of that where it was so France could trade with them again because France, remember it was around the time Niger kicked France out.
And that's what was actually dodgy about that deal was it was to hook up France in some way. Do you remember that? I can't speak to that. What I do know about the first deal is that it just dealt with nuclear, right? And Israel hated that, and neocons hated that because they wanted basically to completely neuter Iran so that Iran would no longer support groups like Hezbollah, which act as a deterrent to Israeli aggression. Right.
And that's why Trump tore it up is because he wanted something more complete. And the question is, is Iran going to agree to something that makes it that basically undermines its standing with its allies, including Hezbollah, which it's invested a lot in being a partner of and which helps stand up to Israeli aggression in the region? That's that's the question. But here is Barack Ravid of Axios. This is what Netanyahu is pushing Trump to do.
Netanyahu thinks the chances of a U.S.-Iran nuclear deal are extremely low, but will present to Trump how a good deal should look like, an Israeli official says. Netanyahu wants the Libya model, full dismantling of Iran's nuclear program.
The Libya model, what's the Libya model? That's where Libya gave up its nuclear program and basically all of its deterrence. And then what happened? It got regime changed. So that's what you're going to sodomize you with a stick. Exactly. I wonder if they'll bite on that.
Wow. Exactly. That's literally happened. So Gaddafi gave up his nuclear program. He gave up all his deterrence and he ended up getting sodomized by U.S. backed rebels. That's one of the worst deals I've ever heard of. That's like the worst deal possible. Here's Trita Parsi with his analysis.
Oh, let me, I don't think, okay, there we go. There is much focus on Trump's claim that his envoys will meet with the Iranians on Sunday in direct talks. Though there was no confirmation from the Iranian side of such a meeting, it would be a positive development if the two parties meet, particularly if the meeting is direct. But the more important variable is one that continues to remain murky.
What are the parameters of the talks and what red lines and strategy is Trump pushing? If Trump seeks to dismantle the Iranian nuclear program, Libya style, which is exactly what Netanyahu was pushing him to do. In addition to closing down Iran's missile program and Tehran's relation with its relations with its regional partners, then diplomacy will most likely be dead on arrival. This strategy has been favored by the Israelis, John Bolton and Mike Pompeo, precisely because they knew it would fail.
If Trump's strategy is centered on achieving a verification-based deal that prevents an Iranian bomb, his only red line, then there is reason to be optimistic about the upcoming talks. What Trita Parsi is saying is if Trump wants to basically return to the deal that he tore up
in his first term, then yes, there's plenty of room for negotiation. If you're trying to get more than that, a Libya-style deal where basically Iran makes itself vulnerable to another regime change operation like what happened in Libya, then forget it. Does Israel, honestly, God, now 9-11, you know, uh, uh,
a bunch of people were like, yeah, let's go over there and clean it up. That was 20 years ago. Not everybody's that big of a moron that thinks that that was a great idea that we did that. In fact, I would say very few people who benefited from it think that, right? Correct. So in Iran, who's going to send their kids? That wasn't October 7th. It wasn't 9-11 here. That was there.
So I noticed them trying to whip up the same fervor as if it was an attack on the one I saw when I was in New York. And I don't see who's going to join up for that. Well, Kurt, one answer is this guy, Senator Tom Cotton, a Republican. This is him recently questioning the incoming chair of the Joint Chiefs at his confirmation hearing. And Tom Cotton wanted...
His assurance that basically war with Iran would not be such a big deal, that there's too much hysteria of the possibility of war with Iran. There's some hysteria about the prospect of the president ordering these strikes or someone like you in uniform providing him advice that it's going to lead to another forever war or another endless war. He quotes what happened.
You know, one of these forever? They only last 20, 30 years. Yeah, like Afghanistan. Forever war in Afghanistan. That went fine. What's wrong with having that again? Another forever war. Oh my God, that's great. And by the way, this is what Trump campaigned against. Trump campaigned against the forever war. So Tom Cotton is mocking basically a central tenet of Trump's campaign. The hysteria. Yeah. I'm being a lady about it. It must be my ovaries. I need a hysterectomy for my hysteria, Tom. Yeah.
Wow. Are you aware of operations, maybe operations against Iran like the tanker wars in 1988, in which the forceful but discriminant application of military power did not lead to a forever war or an endless war, but rather led to peace and stability?
Yes, sir. Those examples in our history do exist. Maybe the Qasem Soleimani strike in 2020 as well that caused Iran to pull in its horns for the rest of President Trump's first term. Thank you, General Cain. Thank you, Senator. So there's Tom Cotton saying, look, what's with the hysteria? War can lead to peace. Literally, that's his argument. War with Iran can lead to peace. I think the kill in their general might be why these talks ain't going to work out.
Well, I guess you don't want it to work out. So yeah. And what happened, by the way, after Trump ordered the killing of Qasem Soleimani, Iran retaliated by striking a U.S. base in Iraq and wounded a bunch of U.S. soldiers. And that's exactly what Tom Cotton wants to sacrifice once again. He wants to sacrifice them once again to get his war with Iran. The question is, who's Trump going to listen to? Is it people like Netanyahu and Tom Cotton?
Or is it people like Tucker Carlson who's been speaking out against the war with Iran? That's the question before us as the U.S. and Iran renew direct talks. The answer is neither. Laura Loomer. Here's Donald Trump welcoming Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House. They're good friends. He's tall.
Trump is tall, you know, and Netanyahu, of course, coming to the U.S. despite being a wanted war criminal by the International Criminal Court, which has issued a warrant for his arrest for the genocide in Gaza. But that doesn't matter to Trump. He doesn't care about that. And Trump, in talking with Netanyahu, not giving up on his plans.
to take control of the Gaza Strip. Note how he was asked, do you think blocking humanitarian aid
Was that reporter for doing that? That's how that came off to me. Well, great. I mean, he's from the Times of Israel, so that's a fair assumption. Yeah. But of course, Trump is going to avoid that question because, look, Israel has been blocking everything getting into Gaza for several weeks now. A complete blockade.
which is collective punishment. It's a war crime, but totally normalized. This is everyday slaughtering mass numbers of civilians in Gaza has become totally normalized. So Trump is just going to avoid the question. Remember we killed all them kids with sanctions? Sure. That's what sanctions is, a group punishment, a bunch of people. And I don't know why it's not considered a heinous crime. I guess it is by the people it's happening to. Yep.
Here's more of Trump's answer. An incredible piece of important real estate. And I think it's something that we would be involved in. But, you know, having a peace force like the United States, they're controlling and owning the Gaza Strip would be a good thing because right now all it is is for years and years. All I hear about is killing and Hamas and problems.
And if you take the people, the Palestinians, and move them around to different countries, and you have plenty of countries that will do that, and you really have a freedom zone. You call it the freedom zone. A free zone, a zone where people aren't going to be killed every day. That's a hell of a place. You know what I call it? A great location that nobody wants to live in because they really don't.
Well, I don't know what to... Who's going to control that natural gas? You know, the trillions of natural gas in Gaza? Do we get that when we take control? That's what the freedom zone means is we have the freedom to steal. Exactly, yeah. Look, he says no one wants to live there. People of Gaza would love to live there. They want to live in their homes. They just don't want to live under occupation and now genocide. And he makes this all seem as if it's some kind of natural disaster when really this is
a man-made phenomenon funded by funded and armed by him because he's giving israel the weapons and all the support it needs to carry out mass murder inside of gaza but he's still talking about rather than ending the genocide about basically forcing palestinians to flee so he's talking about not only the us taking gaza but then committing ethnic cleansing of the people who live there good living real living where hamas and all of the the problems they have the level of death on the gaza strip is just
Incredible. And I've said it. I don't understand why Israel ever gave it up. Israel owned it. It wasn't this man, so I can say it. He wouldn't have given it up. I know him very well. There's no way they took that potion. This guy doesn't give up any land. He grabs it. He's a hungry hippo, this guy.
Okay, so what he's doing there is basically he's endorsing the ultra-extremist fringe of the Israeli spectrum, which is mad that in 2005, Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip. They had settlements there.
And they did that not because they wanted to make peace, but because it was becoming too expensive to maintain and just too difficult to maintain these illegal Jewish settlers in occupied Gaza. So they pulled them out and then moved them all to the occupied West Bank. And that's what Israel really wanted to steal is the West Bank land because the West Bank is more valuable for Israel than Gaza is because the West Bank has major water reserves. So Trump is saying that even that was a mistake. Israel used to have Gaza as if
Israel owned it. He even says they owned it when really Israel was illegally occupying it, never had a right to it. And Trump is basically throwing all that out the window and endorsing the ultra extremist Israeli point of view that we never should have removed illegal settlements from Gaza. First of all, just the fact that there's anybody in this current year that's called a settler, that's a huge problem. I can't understand why...
Just the word itself tells you they're stealing somebody's land. Yes. And settler, that's even a watered down term because they're really actually, they're colonists. They're colonizing someone else's land. A settler means, oh, you're going to a land, maybe it's empty, you're going to settle it. A land without a people for people without a land. All right. So here's Netanyahu commenting on this. Of course, he loves Trump's plan of ethnic cleansing. And here's Netanyahu saying that
Basically, Palestinians should be free to go wherever they want. He doesn't understand what the problem is. And he denies that Israel has played any role in keeping them imprisoned and mass murdered in Gaza. I think what the president talked about is, first of all, to give people a choice. Gaza, Gazans were closed in. Any other place, including in arenas of battle, I mean, whether it's Ukraine or Syria or any other place, people could leave.
Gaza was the only place where they locked them in. We didn't lock them in. They're locked in. We didn't lock them in. We didn't lock them in. Israel controls all the border crossings in and out of Gaza. On the Israel side. We didn't lock them in. They had a siege around them for the last 20 years. Exactly. So this is just like
This is peak Orwellian propaganda. Israel is the occupier of Gaza. They prevented people from leaving. The only people who can get out now are people, are Gazans who can come up with enough money, like thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars to basically bribe Egyptians at the border to let them free, to leave. But that's a very small number of people. Otherwise, Israel keeps the people, uh,
in Gaza under total siege. And this guy, Nenio, claims we didn't lock them in when Israel's the military occupier of Gaza. It's put them under siege. Cancer patients can't even come. You know what he's referring to? Let me finish this thought. Oh, sorry. Cancer patients, cancer patients can't even leave Gaza. Many cancer patients can't even leave Gaza because Israel won't let them leave to get treatment. Wounded Palestinians, wounded who've been...
gravely wounded by Israel. They can't leave because Israel won't let them out. And he goes to the White House and claims that we didn't lock them in. I mean, it's just the lying is off the charts. Weren't they before allowing you, you could leave but never come back? Wasn't it, we'll make your life hell, and if you say you want to leave, you could just give up all rights to anything you have here? Only if you can afford it. Only if you can afford to pay the bribe to Egypt. That's your only chance of getting out. Trust me, I have a lot of friends who would love to escape, but they can't.
Because they don't have the money. And it's Israel that is locking them all in. So this is just, it's a malicious lie. And coming from someone who controls the fate of 2 million people, claiming that he has nothing to do with their torment as he
carries out a mass extermination campaign and won't let people leave and blocks and blocks all aid from getting in he's opposing a siege from getting in all right let's hear more he called them amalek so that means which were like some people that deserve to be all murdered together at once so that's his feeling so he don't care and what is wrong with giving people a choice now we've been talking uh looking over lunch about some countries i'm
I won't go into them right now. They're saying, you know, if Gazans want to leave, we want to take them in. And I think this is the right thing to do. If you give, you know, it's going to take years to rebuild Gaza. In the meantime, people can have an option. The president has a vision. Countries are responding to that vision. We're working on it. I hope we'll have good news for you.
All right, let's go to one more clip of Netanyahu because he keeps talking about how, you know, yeah, it'd be great if Palestinians had the free choice to go wherever they want, except for the homes that they were expelled from inside Israel, which is basically the majority of Palestinians in Gaza are either refugees from what is now Israel or the descendants of those refugees. But will Netanyahu let them come back to their homes? Absolutely not. But here he is. Enabling the people of Gaza to freely make a choice to go wherever they want. I mean, they should have that choice.
And the President put forward a vision, a bold vision, which we discussed as well, including the countries that might be amenable and are amenable to accepting Palestinians of their free choice if they choose to go there. And I think that's the second thing that we discussed. But the hostages came right on top.
Yeah, free choice, free choice. Again, if you were to give Palestinians and Gaza a free choice, I think most of them would say, I want to go back to my home that you stole from me in what is now Israel. But that's not on the menu here. What's on the menu from both these people is ethnic cleansing of 2 million people. And that's why they continue to attack Gaza because they want to make it unlivable to push out as many people as possible.
I'm sorry, Kurt. It's so grim. There's not much to joke about, but it's just, that's, this is just, this is what's out in the open. And here's Trump being reminded today at the White House that, hey, a lot of people voted for you
including Arab Americans, because you promised to stop the carnage in the Middle East. So what happened to that? And this was Trump's response. The war is still going on. The war is still going on. The Americans who voted for you voted for you and not for Biden because you promised them to end the war in Gaza.
I'm very honored by that vote too. The war is still going on and there's no... So Trump says, "I'm very honored by those who voted for me to end the wars in the Middle East." So what is he doing to live up to that? Because right now Israel is carrying out mass murder campaigns, slaughtering civilians every single day with his support. So if he's honored by the vote of people who wanted peace, why isn't he pushing for peace?
And why is he pushing right now to give Israel all the weapons it needs to carry out mass murder? They've killed more Americans than Iran has ever done. Israel has. That's right. Yeah. And the West Bank, they just killed a Palestinian-American teenager who was allegedly throwing a rock at settlers. And so Israel shot him and killed him. Of course, no mention of that today from Trump.
The Press: -- a hostage deal. Do you have any update on that? The President: Well, I'd like to see the war stop. And I think the war will stop at some point. That won't be in the too distant future. Right now, we have a problem with hostages. We're trying to get the hostages out. We got quite a few of them out, but it's a long process. It shouldn't be that long.
So that's Trump at the White House claiming that he thinks the war will be over soon, but we have a problem with the hostages. Well, who's in the way of releasing the hostages? It was Netanyahu who blew up the ceasefire deal.
the next phase of which would have seen all the remaining Haashes released so that it could continue to carry out mass murder in Gaza. And by now endorsing, again, the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, Trump is reminding everybody that despite his campaign pledges to bring peace, he's only giving Netanyahu a green light for more mass murder. ♪
The Russian envoy to the US, his name is Kirill Dmitriev, and he is in the US for talks with senior US officials from the Trump administration, also in Congress as well. And he went on Fox News to talk about the progress so far of these negotiations toward ending the proxy war in Ukraine. ...rise, the talks right now, and how they're going. I think President Trump's administration has made tremendous progress.
There was no dialogue with Russia in Biden administration for the last three years. There was no trying to understand Russian position. There was no real solutions that could have been successful. And what President Trump team has done, they understood what the solution space may be, and they achieved the first de-escalation ever in the conflict, which is stopping hits on energy infrastructure between Russia and Ukraine.
So we are having good discussions. Our diplomatic people are also discussing possible outcomes. But there is no question that President Trump's team not only stopped World War III from happening, but also had already achieved sizable progress on Ukraine resolution. So he says two important things there. First of all, he says the Trump administration is doing what the Biden administration refused to do, which is talk.
The Biden administration wouldn't even speak to Russia while fueling a massive proxy war in Ukraine against it. But then he says the Trump administration in talking to Russia has helped avoid World War III. And you might hear that and think, OK, he's exaggerating. He's doing that to flatter Trump. Well, guess what? There are people inside the Biden camp who thought the exact same thing as well. That's a takeaway from a new article in The New York Times called The Partnership Report.
The Secret History of the War in Ukraine. It's based on interviews with dozens of officials from the U.S. and other NATO countries that were behind the proxy war in Ukraine. And there are many revelations in there.
Including this, talking about the Biden administration's decision to continually cross its own red lines and provide weapon systems to Ukraine that it previously had ruled out. And that includes HIMARS. So here the Times quotes Celeste Wallander, who was the – under Biden, the Assistant Defense Secretary for International Security Affairs –
And she quotes Mark Milley, General Mark Milley, the former chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. And she says, Milley would always say, you've got a little Russian army fighting a big Russian army, and they're fighting the same way, and the Ukrainians will never win. But then she says, and by contrast to Milley's argument, General Christopher Cavoli, who was the commander of forces in Europe, he argued that with HIMARS, this missile system,
The Ukrainians can fight like we can, and that's how they will start to beat the Russians. So if we just give them our weapon systems, then Ukraine will be on our level, on the U.S.'s level, and then we can beat the Russians. And then, listen to this, at the White House, Joe Biden and his advisors weighed that argument against fears that pushing the Russians would only lead Mr. Putin to panic and widen the war.
When the generals requested HIMARS, one official recalled, the moment felt like, quote, standing on that line wondering, if you take a step forward, is World War III going to break out? And guess what? They took that step forward of authorizing these weapon systems to Ukraine, even though they were wondering, is this going to cause World War III? So they took steps that they were not sure about.
could avoid World War III. They're willing to risk World War III just for their proxy war against Russia. And the New York Times goes on, the unthinkable had become real. The U.S. was now woven into the killing of Russian soldiers on sovereign Russian soil. Yes, that's right. The Biden administration took steps that made the U.S. part of a killing machine against Russians on Russian soil because eventually, because the Biden administration kept crossing its own red lines, the
They were involved not just in attacking Russian forces on Ukrainian soil, but also Russian forces across the border inside of Russia. And here are some of the key takeaways from this piece, which the Times helpfully put together. A U.S. base in Weisbaden, Germany, supplied the Ukrainians with the coordinates of Russian forces on their soil.
So contrary to the widespread view that this was a war between Ukraine and Russia, this actually was a war between Russia against Ukraine and the U.S. with the U.S. choosing the targets for Ukraine from Germany nearby, from a U.S. base in Germany. So at a base in Germany, the U.S. was choosing which targets Ukraine would hit and then giving them to the Ukrainians and the Ukrainians would strike them. So basically it was the U.S. running the war from behind the scenes.
Here's another takeaway. The Biden administration kept moving its red lines. From the first, administration officials sought to lay down a red line. America was not fighting Russia. It was helping Ukraine. Still, they worried that steps taken to accomplish that might provoke Putin to attack NATO targets or perhaps make good on his nuclear threats. Even as the administration developed an ever greater tolerance of risk to help Ukraine meet the evolving threat,
many of the most potentially provocative steps were taken in secret. So yes, we're not fighting Russia. On the other hand, we're going to fight Russia, but just do it in secret and hope that nobody notices, including Russia, which of course Russia knew along that we were doing.
Here's an example of the U.S. moving its red lines. In 2002, the U.S. Navy was authorized to share targeting information for Ukrainian drone strikes on warships just beyond the territorial waters of Russian and ex-Crimea. The CIA was allowed to support Ukrainian operations within Crimean waters. That fall, the spy agency covertly helped Ukrainian drones strike Russian warships in the port of Sevastopol. So the CIA...
The New York Times now admits, of course, way after the fact, was involved in attacking Russian ships inside of Crimea, which Russia seized in 2014 after the U.S. backed a coup in 2014.
in Kyiv. So now we learn after the fact just a new aspect of how dangerous this was that the CIA was being involved in targeting Russian ships. Here's more. In January 2024, U.S. and Ukrainian military officers in Weissbaden in Germany jointly planned a campaign using coalition-supplied long-range missiles along with Ukrainian drones to
to attack about 100 Russian military targets across Crimea. The campaign, named Operation Lunar Hail, largely succeeded in forcing the Russians to pull equipment, facilities, and forces in Crimea back to the Russian mainland. So, Malcolm, let me bring you in here. Now, of course, I mean, we've been saying this all along.
We've covered this endlessly here on the Jimmy Dore Show, as we have also at Grayzone, that the U.S. was actively involved as a belligerent in this war. This idea that we were just helping the Ukrainians, giving them the equipment they needed, that was always a farce. We were running this war from behind the scenes. And now it takes a long time, but the New York Times comes out with a very long piece confirming it.
Well, I think you're failing to factor in one important aspect, which is that it's not just a matter of us supplying Ukraine with, you know, the weapons of war they need to wage this war. But we need to supervise closely what they're doing because left to their own devices, they'll just sell them on the black market. They won't even attack Russia. So.
you're criticizing the CIA for just doing their due diligence by making sure that they actually use the weapons we give them instead of selling them, often winding up
facing back against them by a circuitous route. So I think that's what you need to factor in also, Aaron. Not to criticize. So the CIA stands for fiscal responsibility, basically. Fiscal responsibility. I mean, when your kid turns 15 or 16 and gets their driver's license, you don't just throw them the keys and say, hey, knock yourself out. You want to drive with them. Make sure they're driving properly and not...
you know, getting drunk and driving, you got to supervise. And I think that is, I mean, I'm joking, of course, but that is an actual lesson of the early parts of this war, which is that a lot of the weaponry that we provide to Ukraine was just sold off to enrich the, you know, Ukrainian oligarchs.
That's not your point, I know. Here's another takeaway from the New York Times. Ultimately, the U.S. military and CIA were allowed to help with strikes into Russia. We were directly assisting, in fact, overseeing strikes, not just on Russian forces instead of Ukraine, but strikes into Russia. And looking back on it now, Russia practiced restraint. Imagine if Russia had decided to hit back at the same U.S. forces that were helping Ukraine strike into Russia.
It would have been the World War III that these officials feared. Russia thankfully restrained itself, but had they not, it would have been even more disastrous. And here's one of the key architects of this U.S. assistance policy of running the war from behind the scenes, General Christopher Cavoli. Watch him talk at a congressional hearing about the effectiveness of U.S.-backed missile strikes by Ukraine at Russian forces.
How effective have the long-range missiles that we've allowed Ukrainians to shoot into Russia, how effective has that been? Very. In all areas? Yeah, they've been extremely effective, sir. I could go into this in private session, but the United States makes some very good weaponry, and the ones we've donated have been very, very effective. In closed session, I'd be happy to talk to you about a few of the things they've done with it.
Now, why is he so happy to go talk about this in closed session? It's because in public session, he doesn't want to admit that he's the one running the war from behind the scenes. He's the one telling Ukraine what to strike, which Russian forces to hit. And that has to be kept in secret away from the public because if the public maybe knew that the U.S. was secretly running the war in Ukraine, they might have some feelings about it and might be objecting. And that's why he had to talk about it in closed session.
Well, I like that he said he's asked, you know, how effective have they been? And he says very. And then the senator asks for clarification and he says extremely. So, you know, not, you know, I don't want to just leave it at very and let you draw your own conclusions. Also extremely effective. But I but what you were saying before about how the Russians and Putin have actually shown restraint.
It seems like the waging of this war has been a steady process of pushing things as close as possible to World War Three without getting over that. And each those red lines that the Biden administration was establishing were also sort of red lines to see if
Is this going to get to World War III? No? Okay, I guess we can get a little farther. I guess we can get a little farther. And it's like, just how much can we enrich our military contractor donors without us all, you know, without bringing about the extinction of humanity? And, you know, I think credit to them. They've done a pretty good job, Aaron.
But the other thing is that the talking points about Putin are always that he's a madman. You know, he's this crazed Putin. And he's the only sane one who has prevented this from becoming World War III. That's correct. Depending on...
Putin not being the way we describe him to the American people. - That's exactly right. While claiming that Putin is a madman, wants to take over Europe or the rest of the world, they've been relying on him to be restrained. Because as this article in the New York Times points out, it's not Russia that kept crossing its own red lines.
It was the U.S. that kept crossing its own red lines. We heard so much about Putin's red lines and how he hasn't enforced them, so therefore it's okay to keep sending weapons to Ukraine. Putin actually didn't set out red lines. The U.S. set out red lines, and one of the red lines for Biden was we don't want to fight Russia directly. But they kept threatening it by moving over their own red lines, because Biden initially said we're not going to give Ukraine weapons that can strike into Russia. We're not going to give them these long-range weapons. He crossed that every single time because he was so desperate to keep the proxy war going. And why?
We know now, they all admitted it was not even to help Ukraine. It was to weaken Russia. And so to weaken Russia, the Biden administration was willing to not only sacrifice Ukraine, but risk World War III. And three years later, the New York Times finally comes out and admits it, thereby catching up with those of us who've been saying this from the very start.
Yeah, they, I mean, I know the New York Times reporters, one of their key sources is Jimmy Dore Show three years ago. So they just watch old episodes and they're like, oh, this is interesting. You should write about this. So Donald Trump has insisted that he will not be cutting benefits, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid. But then you have Republican senators like Bill Cassidy saying stuff like this.
Let's bring that approach not to just what Doge is doing, discretionary spending, but let's look at Medicare. Is there some way that we can cut Medicare so that it's, excuse me, reform Medicare so that benefits stay the same, but that is less expensive, more efficient? I would say that there is, and that's where our opportunity lies. So that's a comment from Senator Bill Cassidy. He says, are there ways we can cut Medicare? Then he corrects himself, says reform Medicare, but
But he's confirming or speaking to the fears of many people who see Trump and his allies talking about reforming Medicare and what they hear is cutting Medicare. So let me bring in a longtime champion of Medicare for all, former Congress member Dennis Kucinich. What do you make of Doge and Trump's talk about reforming Medicare while insisting he's not going to cut people's benefits? Well, you know, here's a problem with going into government and
And coming from a privileged position, I mean, if you can grow up where your families are very wealthy, that's great. But if that's the only experience you have in life and then you become a leader of the nation, you may not have an appropriate sympathy for how people struggle day to day.
how healthcare expenses, you know, even if people are covered by Medicare, are still very difficult for people to be able to meet. And even if you have health insurance, you're not Medicare eligible. The cost of healthcare is ruining a lot of families' economic future. So any talk of reducing healthcare benefits
whether in terms of reducing Medicare or Medicaid, just shows that our leaders don't understand what people go through on a daily basis. If you understood how senior citizens depend on Social Security, how their savings are evaporated and their retirement pensions were reduced,
taken away by corporations who tanked a corporation and threw it into bankruptcy and put the pensioners at the back of the line. If you knew how tough people were having it, you'd never even come close to that. So I'm hopeful that there'll be an increased understanding
that Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security shouldn't be touched. Now, the question of is there fraud in government programs? Yes, you find fraud just about everywhere, public or private. When I was mayor of Cleveland years ago, I was able to cut city spending by 10% in the first year
without borrowing any money by eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse. Now, yeah, that exists, but you can't tell people you're going to cut their benefits. If you eliminate the waste, fraud, and abuse, you have more money to give to people, right? It's not less. So, you know, for me, you know, I personally, Aaron,
I think we ought to have Medicare for all for real, that everyone should be covered. It shouldn't be a privilege in a democratic society. Fundamental right. No one should have to worry about being sick. No one should have to work a lifetime and to find in their later years an illness causes them to lose everything they ever worked for. No one should have to divert their life's dream because of an illness at an early age.
You know, the one thing that I heard Boris Johnson say years ago is how when somebody's sick in the UK because of the NHS program, the nation gathers around the bedside.
of that person. What an image. The idea that we all care for each other. We need to go back to an America like that. Really cares, where we really care for each other. And I mean, it's possible we could get there, but right now, with this is going on partisan, ideologically, the idea of one nation is tough for people to be able to think about.
Hey, become a premium member. Go to JimmyDoreComedy.com. Sign up. It's the most affordable premium program in the business. All the voices performed today are by the one and only, the inimitable Mike McRae. He can be found at MikeMcRae.com. That's it for this week. You be the best you can be, and I'll keep being me.
Do not freak out.