Trump and Netanyahu Start a New Regime-Change War against Iran
Donald Trump and Netanyahu’s escalation into a U.S.-led war against Iran—announced via social media without congressional approval—ignores his 2024 anti-interventionist campaign, instead fulfilling neoconservative and pro-Israel agendas tied to billionaires like Miriam Adelson. Despite Trump’s prior rhetoric against Iraq-style wars and Iran’s compliance with nuclear inspections, the conflict risks destabilizing global oil markets via Strait of Hormuz closures while depleting U.S. military stockpiles. Critics argue the real goal is weakening Iran to secure Israel’s regional dominance, with figures like Bill Ackman and Lindsey Graham endorsing the move despite its potential to backfire politically, leaving Trump’s "America First" promises in ruins amid broken economic pledges and endless foreign entanglements. [Automatically generated summary]
All right, so this is like the 14th or 15th time that we have attempted to go live today.
I'm not entirely sure that it's working.
I hope that it is.
We're going to just see in a second.
Yeah, unbelievably, shockingly, it actually is working.
I'm going to be checking to make sure that the audio is good.
I'm actually at a farm, so we had to struggle a little bit today to get a setup.
As you undoubtedly know, the United States has started a brand new war, this time one that it is launching jointly with Israel against Iran.
Unlike the last joint U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran last June, which in terms of the United States' direct military involvement lasted only one night, was directed at three specific nuclear facilities that Donald Trump the next day promised had been, quote, completely and totally obliterated.
This war is far broader and more ambitious in scope, in duration, and in ambition.
And there's a lot to talk about here.
I think it's worth going as in-depth as possible.
It's hard to imagine anything more consequential, more important that requires serious analysis than a brand new war at the heart of the Middle East against a country that's population is close to 100 million.
So basically roughly four times the population that Iraq had when the United States so destructively and disastrously intervened in that country, invaded and attempted to change the regime there back in 2003.
The potential for destruction, for damage, for instability is infinitely greater here, which is saying a lot.
I think it's worth remembering that even Tony Blair, one of the world leaders most responsible for the attack on Iraq, said that one of the unanticipated outcomes was that the power vacuum that was created by the removal of Saddam Hussein regime by the U.S. and the UK and the coalition of the willing is what led to the emergence of ISIS, which then necessitated its own multiple year, multi-front wars with huge numbers of people killed as well.
So oftentimes the consequences of these wars cannot be anticipated, even if the leaders who start them think they're doing so in a way that they hope will be only a limited engagement, end up dragged in in a way that often happens through mission creep.
That's, of course, what happened in the Vietnam War.
No one ever imagined it would be a 13-year war that would kill millions of people, consume the lives of close to 60,000 American troops.
So we have another American war.
And I do think it's worth noting that anywhere in the world, essentially, maybe except Israel, when you say, hey, we have a new war, our country just started a new war.
That's like a once-in-a-lifetime event.
If that constantly hear about China and its militarism and aggression, the last time China fought a war, not defending China, not glorifying China.
It's just a fact that the last time China fought a war was 1979.
1979.
That's 47 years ago.
And that war was a one-month border dispute with Vietnam.
It's not common in just about every country on the planet for new wars to be started by the government.
Only in the United States and Israel is that so commonplace that you go on and say, hey, we have a new war.
And people don't react with shock.
They say, oh, really?
Which country are we attacking this time?
Now, I want to delve deeply into what President Trump said, because the way in which he announced this war, the way in which he explained it, was not at all similar to what George Bush and Dick Cheney did throughout 2002 and 2003, when they did an 18-month media-engaged, highly orchestrated public relations campaign throughout all of the United States and throughout the world to lay the foundation for why we had to go and start into war in Iraq,
Lack Of War Plan00:03:59
why it was in American interest to remove the government.
Of course, we all know that those were filled with lies.
That campaign was, but at least there was an effort.
And there was also a congressional vote.
Bush and Cheney's view was we can start the Iraq war.
We don't need congressional authorization.
But congressional leaders in the Democratic Party pled, please pleaded, you know, please let us vote on this war.
We promised to vote yes.
And so once they promised to vote yes, once it was a certain outcome that the government, that the Congress would approve the war, Bush and Cheney allowed the Congress to vote yes.
They voted yes.
So we have that as well.
We had nothing like that here.
No congressional authorization, no congressional debate.
There was a briefing of what's called the Gang of Eight in the middle of this last week.
That's the majority and minority leaders of both the House and Senate, the chair and ranking members of the intelligence committee.
But other than that, there was no briefing on this war.
There was no vote on this war.
There was no debate on this war.
There's been no attempt to persuade the American people.
Instead, Donald Trump woke up in the middle of the night.
Maybe he stayed up.
But around three, four in the morning, East Coast time, he posted an eight minute video on social media triumphantly announcing this new war with extremely broad and ambitious plans for what this war was going to accomplish.
And while it was very broad and very sweeping, it also was almost entirely bereft of an actual war plan, of any concrete objectives we were attempting to achieve.
And most lacking of all, most glaringly lacking was any sort of an exit plan.
Like when does this war end?
What checklist of accomplishments need to be checked in order for us to say, okay, our business in this war is over.
That's always the most dangerous thing when you start a war with no defined mission.
Maybe they have a secret defined mission that's very clear, but the one they announced publicly is a model of ambiguity and vagueness and almost begging to be filled in with a long-term war.
And just as was true in Iraq, when we heard, oh, this war is going to be over so quickly.
We're hearing, oh, don't worry, the war is going to be over quickly.
They're going to treat us as liberators.
They're saying we're not going to put boots on the ground.
Trump's not saying that, but the people justified in the war are saying that.
Then what is the purpose of this war?
Trump is calling for regime change.
Does that mean that it's a U.S. goal to facilitate regime change?
What does that look like?
If we kill their leaders, if we take out and decapitate the leadership structure of the Iranian political and military class like we did in Iraq, who then deals with the ensuing chaos in the middle of this extremely volatile region?
Massive airstrikes all throughout Iran by the United States and Israel today.
Retaliation by Iran, including a battery of ballistic missiles that fell on Israel.
We don't know how many.
Just like in last June, Israel was, as Trump said, hit very hard by Iran's battery of ballistic missiles, but Israel censored the press, didn't allow any journalists to show the extent of the damage.
The only images that were allowed to be shown are ones where the ballistic missiles hit a civilian structure.
But Trump himself said Israel was hit very hard by this war, that there were buildings taken out.
So we know Iran is already shooting large numbers of ballistic missiles at Israel, but they're also doing so at countries in the region which host American military bases, including Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain.
There's images of hotels and other things on fire in Dubai, not apparently places or hotels that were hit by missiles, but ones that were intercepted where debris fell.
There's also reports that Iran has closed the Strait of Hormuz, which is the critical commercial canal through which the nations or the global, the world's oil supply runs.
Always a big danger of going to war with Iran was that they would close that strait and would disrupt the global oil supply and gas prices skyrocketing.
All of this remains to be seen.
It's not even 24 hours, but there are some things we know.
Liz Cheney's Warning00:11:55
And I want to start with this.
Ever since Donald Trump emerged in 2016 as a major political figure, 2015, and became a viable political candidate, president's candidate in 2016, he has defined himself by two issues.
One, immigration, and the other by stopping regime change wars and reversing decades of bipartisan warm policy in the United States.
And it wasn't just a generalized commitment.
It was very specific to war with Iran, to regime change, war with Iran.
To call this administration and the 2024 campaign that ushered it in one of the most fraudulent presidential campaigns in the history of the United States is not just plausible or tolerable or reasonable, but necessary.
There's just no way around it.
If you're a Trump supporter, if you're a supporter of this war, feel free to make all the arguments in favor of why this war is important, why we have to go change the regime of Iran, why we have to bomb Iran until, as President Trump put it, we annihilate their Navy.
We obliterate their ballistic missile capabilities.
But don't try and argue that this isn't a complete abandonment and reversal of every single thing Donald Trump and the Republican Party and the Magda movement pitched itself as being throughout three elections over a decade, but particularly back in 2024.
Let's just take a look at a couple of them, beginning with this, which is what the Republican Party, the official Republican Party account on social media posted on November 4th, 2024, the week of the 2024 election.
Vote for the pro-peace ticket.
Vote Trump and Vance.
And there you see a picture of Donald Trump and JD Vance smiling, at least in McKinnis of Vance.
And they have this slogan laying over the two candidates called the pro-peace ticket.
So we're talking here about the pro-peace ticket.
Now, if you want to come and say, oh, well, they meant peace through strength.
That's fine.
But peace through strength means you build up your military.
You show the world that you have a strong deterrent capabilities and that you don't need any wars.
Peace through strength does not mean we're going to keep starting new wars in order eventually at some point in the future to usher in peace.
That's the Orwellian version of that slogan, like the most extreme satire that Orwell offered to illustrate how utterly terrorized party members speak and think or how they're trained and indoctrinated to reason after years of intense propaganda.
War is peace.
Ignorance is strength.
Freedom is slavery.
But the first is war is peace.
And I see a lot of Trump supporters saying, no, no, actually, by starting this war against Iran, this new regime change war against Iran, this is a fulfillment of the agenda of peace.
So if that's something you're willing to say, you're willing to say anything.
Nobody in the Trump movement during the 2024 campaign thought that President Trump was promising to bring about regime change in Iran.
Everything they said, as I just showed you, was the opposite.
And I have a lot more to show you in that regard because I know there's so much resistance.
Here's a 2023 op-ed that JD Vance wrote in the Wall Street Journal announcing why he was supporting President Trump, why President Trump would be his presidential candidate in 2024.
This is obviously in the middle of the, not even before the Republican primary began.
So JD Vance said, my candidate for 2024 is Donald Trump.
And he focused on foreign policy.
And the headline of this op-ed was, Trump's best foreign policy, not starting any wars.
And then underneath that, he said, he has my support in 2024, 24 because I know he won't recklessly send Americans to fight overseas.
Here is David Sachs, who became a big Trump donor from Silicon Valley.
He serves in the administration as the czar for artificial intelligence and crypto.
And here is what David Sachs said.
This is back in March of 2025 when neocons were pushing the Trump administration to go to war with Iran.
This is when people like Charlie Kirk and Tucker Carlson started sounding the alarm about how serious this neocon and Israeli pressure was to drive United States into a new war with Iran.
Many people within MAGA spoke up.
David Sachs was one of them.
And here's what he said, quote, what did removing Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad get us?
Chaos, civil war, genocide.
The rule for regime operations, regime change operations in the Middle East is that they don't flip a country from good to bad.
They flip a country from bad to worse.
Anyone can say whatever they want now to justify this new war.
This was the MAGA consensus for 10 years.
I mean, there's too many examples for me to show you, but here's another one.
This is from Tulsi Gabbard, who became a big Trump supporter in 2024.
She's now his director of national intelligence.
By all accounts, she tried to put a roadblock between Trump and Iran and Trump and Israel during the first bombing campaign in 2025.
She went to testify before the Senate in April of 2025 and said the consensus of the intelligence community is that Iran is not on a path to trying to acquire a nuclear weapon, which the opposite claim became Trump's primary argument for bombing Iran.
And when confronted by that, Trump said, I don't care what Tulsi Gabbard thinks.
I don't care what she says.
She's just the director of national intelligence.
Here's what she was saying in the weeks leading up to the 2024 election, quote, a vote for Kamala Harris as a vote for Dick Cheney and a vote for war, war, and more war.
Oh, no, you wouldn't want that.
You wouldn't want a vote for Dick Cheney and a vote for war, war, and more war.
You certainly don't want that.
Don't vote for Kamala because that's what you're going to get.
But instead, a vote for Donald Trump is a vote to end wars, not start them.
We are at historic crossroads.
Our God-given rights are under attack.
Now is the time for us to stand together for love of country and for Donald Trump to get us back on the path to peace, freedom, and prosperity.
I mean, this was the explicit theme emphasized over and over and over.
I want to remind you of something that happened that I think a lot of people have forgotten.
It occurred in the week leading up to the 2024 election, maybe about eight or nine days prior.
Trump was at a campaign stop on stage.
He was being interviewed by Tucker Carlson.
And Trump made comments about Liz Cheney because Liz Cheney was campaigning alongside Kamala Harris in Michigan and other places.
Both her father, Dick Cheney, former Vice President Dick Cheney, the symbol of neocon warmongering, and his daughter, Liz Cheney, also a symbol of neocon warmongering, were campaigning for Kamala Harris had actively, Liz was campaigning for him.
Dick had endorsed her.
And they emphasized it wasn't just because of January 6th, it was because of their belief that Kamala's foreign policy was more aligned with their foreign policy view.
And Trump went on stage and made comments about Liz Cheney that were very similar to comments that I have heard all sorts of liberals make about the Cheneys over the years, but it got radically distorted by CNN and a bunch of Democrats and Liz Cheney herself to try and imply that Trump was like threatening Liz Cheney with firing squad, with execution by firing squad.
When what he was actually saying was the reason Washington is filled with so many sociopathic warmongers who casually send people off to war is because they're never the ones who have to go and fight in those wars, nor is their family.
And if they did have to, they'd probably sing a different tune.
Here's what he said.
And with his daughter, but his daughter is a very dumb individual, very dumb.
She's a radical war hawk.
Let's put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her.
Okay, let's see how she feels about it.
You know, when the guns are trained on her face.
You know, they're all war hawks when they're sitting in Washington in a nice building saying, oh, gee, Will, let's send 10,000 troops right into the mouth of the enemy.
But she's a stupid person.
Yeah, they're all war hawks.
It's so easy to be a war hawk when you're sitting in a building safe distance away when you have never fought in a war.
Your family never fought in a war.
Your sons never fought in a war.
Your daughters never did.
Like the Cheney family, like the Trump family, both Dick Cheney and Donald Trump did everything possible, jumped through every hoop to avoid fighting in the Vietnam War, even though they were of prime fighting age in the 1960s, even though they were supporters of the Vietnam War, let other people go and fight and die for them, continued to do that throughout their whole career.
Trump's critique of Liz Cheney, although obscenely distorted by the media into a threat to execute Liz Cheney by firing squad, was exactly correct.
Washington is filled with a bunch of warmongering psychopaths who don't treat war with the gravity it merits because they're never the ones whose families are at risk from it.
And Trump is now demonstrating that.
Not just with this war, by the way.
Let's remember that throughout 2024, Trump harshly criticized Joe Biden for bombing the Houthis in Yemen, saying it was an awful idea, completely unnecessary.
All you have to do is pick up the phone and solve it diplomatically with the Houthis.
Trump gets into office.
One of the first things he does is orders a restarting and an escalation of Biden's bombing campaign in Yemen that he had harshly criticized throughout the 2024 campaign, only to see after a month that none of the things he was promised would happen as a result of that would actually be fulfilled.
It was incredibly expensive.
And this is very important.
At the time, and still, we were feeding enormous amounts of weapons to Ukraine, to Israel, and then using those in defense of Israel and in Yemen.
And we were depleting our stockpiles rapidly.
I've had Dan Caldwell on, who worked at the highest levels of the Trump Defense Department before being fired through a fabricated leaking scandal.
He worked for Pete Hexad.
He talks about it all the time, including the fact that the U.S. and Israel desperately needed to end the war with Iran last year because they were running out of anti-missile battery and other kinds of weapons that are needed both for defensive and offensive purposes.
And Trump saw that we just didn't have the weapons in Yemen to fight.
And he ordered after one month, a cessation of that war, but he did restart it.
He obviously has spent a lot of money, a lot of military resources, a lot of missiles blowing up boats off the coast of Venezuela.
And then that operation to invade Venezuela and take their leader.
Obviously, none of that was part of the 2024 campaign.
We bombed Iran last year with Israel.
We're bombing Iran again now with Israel in a much broader and more dangerous manner.
Here is what Stephen Miller had to say in the wake of controversy over Trump's comments that I just showed you about Liz Cheney.
This is Stephen Miller, who is a fanatical supporter of Israel.
Undoubtedly a big supporter, by all accounts, everything I've heard, things have reported publicly of the attack on Iran for and with Israel.
Here's what he had to say.
This is again right in the lead up to the 2024 election.
He said, quote, to anyone still gullible enough to fall for scummy media hoaxes, Trump said, and this is what Trump said.
Trump did not say what the media falsely attributed to him that he wanted to assassinate Liz Cheney.
But what Trump did say is what Stephen Miller is about to summarize, quote, warmongering neocons love sending your kids to die for wars.
Trump's Restraint Debate00:06:15
They would never fight themselves.
Liz Cheney is Kamala's top advisor.
Liz wants to invade the whole Middle East.
Kamala equals World War III.
Trump equals peace.
I mean, I don't know if anyone believed that, what Stephen Miller was saying.
But he was right that warmongering neocons want to send your kids constantly to fight in wars for their own benefit or the benefit of other countries that they don't have the courage to themselves fight in.
But the idea that Trump, that Kamala will start wars in the Middle East and Trump won't, obviously that turned out to be the opposite of the truth.
Trump just started a gigantic war in Iran with Iran in the middle of the Middle East.
Here is what Charlie Kirk had to say about this.
I think it is so important because as I said, there were a lot of people.
There are kind of two, generally speaking, broadly speaking, factions of MAGA.
Marjorie Taylor Greene actually said this very well.
One faction you can call MAGA.
That's a phrase that Donald Trump himself coined.
And Trump himself says, MAGA means whatever I say it means.
If I say one day it means no wars, then MAGA means no wars.
If the next day I start a war, MAGA means you cheer for wars.
And to an extent, as far as branding is concerned, Trump is right.
And there are people who identify as MAGA.
And by that, they mean whatever Donald Trump does, that's what I support.
And then there's another faction, as Marjorie Taylor Greene put it, called America First.
Those are people who believe in principles, who are driven by principles, and they support Trump to the extent and only to the extent that he adheres to those principles.
And central to the America First agenda was supposed to be, we don't fight foreign wars for foreign countries.
We don't fight foreign wars for regime change.
We don't fight foreign wars to free other people or build democracy.
We don't fight foreign wars unless that country has attacked us.
And there are people who took that seriously, Marjorie Taylor Greene being one.
She got driven out of Congress by Donald Trump calling her a traitor over and over.
Thomas Massey being another who opposes this war, of course, and has a horde of pro-Trump and Israel First billionaires led by Miriam Middleson pouring tens of millions of dollars into his Kentucky congressional district to remove him from Congress for the crime of placing Israel not on par with the United States, not above the United States, but subordinate to the United States, placing America first.
And Charlie Kirk was one of those people who was trying to preserve America first as the driving ideology of the Trump administration.
And in March of 2025, that was when David Sachs came out and warned people that regime change in Iran, like it did in Iraq and Syria and Libya, would not result in anything better, but only worse.
Charlie Kirk and Tuck Carlson were the two people who really sounded the alarm and said, I think you don't understand, given how much political controversy and drama they're constantly circulating in Washington now that Trump's in office, how dangerous and serious and grave the threat is that these rabid warmongering neocons and Israel-first loyalists who have been wanting the U.S. to go fight a war, a regime change war in Iran for decades to remove Israel's most formidable energy in the region,
enemy in the region, how close they are to getting Trump to support to actually launch a war with Iran.
And they were trying to sound the alarm, not only that it was about to happen, but how dangerous it would be.
And Charlie Kirk spoke out continuously, both in the months leading up to Trump's decision to go bomb Iran that one night and after as well.
Here is one of the first things that Charlie ever tweeted about this during the Trump administration.
This is April, early April of 2025, 10 months ago.
It's going unnoticed because so much other news is happening, but the war drums are beating again in DC.
The warmongers worry this is their last chance.
Who does?
Who worries?
The warmongers worry this is their last chance to get the white whale they've been chasing for 30 years, an all-out regime change war against Iran.
A new Middle East war would be a catastrophic mistake.
Our military stockpiles are depleted from three years of back in Ukraine.
Our effort to restore manufacturing has only just begun and will take years to bear fruit.
War would worsen our already immense deficit in national debt.
Iran is larger than Afghanistan, Syria, and Afghanistan combined.
A war would not be easy and could easily be a calamity.
Thanks to President Trump's restraint during his first term, America has had a golden opportunity to pull away from Middle East quagmires for good.
We shouldn't throw that opportunity away so that some DC has-bins can feel tough by sending young Americans to die yet again.
That's exactly what's happening.
A bunch of DC has-bins, people who have been craving this war for decades, who feel so good about themselves, that they found purpose and strength and courage because they cheer for wars that they themselves never would fight in, never get near.
These are the people who psychologically are demented and who get great fulfillment from watching wars.
Adam Smith warned about this in his iconic and pioneering work, The Wealth of Nations, where he talked about how one of the biggest dangers to empires is that people who live in the nation's capital live far away from battlefields and from the dangers of war.
And so they just constantly cheer for wars because the pleasure they get from reading about their national triumphs, the psychological pulsating sense of strength that it gives them, is worth what he naively assumed at the time would be the greater taxes, the higher taxes they pay for the wars.
We don't pay higher taxes and wars.
We just go further into debt.
And he warned about that.
This is two and a half centuries ago.
And we still have the Lindsey Grahams and the John Boltons and all of the neocons, the Mark Levins, and the Chuck Schumers who are fully behind this war.
Sheldon Adelson's Agenda00:07:03
Even though there were people like Charlie Kirk who were trying to do everything possible to get people to see how dangerous they were.
Here's Charlie Kirk on the Young Turks.
This is the middle of last year.
Listen to what he said about the prospect of a broader war with Iran.
It's just like this war with Iran is a weird fanatical obsession with some people in my party that are here right now, like Senator Lindsey Graham.
And it's insane and it's weird and it's destructive to our own country.
And I speak about it both publicly and privately.
And you know who also is sympathetic when I'm saying JD Vance.
And so that's a fact.
You know, we showed you the bet that JD Vance wrote.
And that's Charlie Kirk, in his own words, in the middle of 2025, saying, my party, people in my party, these warmongers, these neocons have a weird fanatical obsession with the catastrophe of pursuing war with Iran.
Those people won.
Charlie Kirk's not here to express that view anymore, unfortunately.
Now, I just want to show you this amazing exchange that I actually didn't see until today.
It was between Jank Iger and Stephen Miller, Trump's White House top advisor.
I would say the most influential White House advisor.
Again, a fanatical neocon supporter of Israel, longtime advocate for war with Iran.
Jank was pressing him on whether Trump would be willing, again, this was two weeks before the election last year, 2024, to go and fight a war with Iran for Israel.
And here's what Jenk asked him.
So I didn't hear your answer to the question.
Will Trump help Israel with the war it's starting with Iran?
Will he finance it?
Will he use the U.S. military to help Israel fight that war?
You can't say no because you know he's going to do everything Israel asks him to.
And when that happens, you'll pretend it was self-defense.
You had to do it.
It's a special ally.
We have to show how tough we are.
And you'll just get us, you'll just get us mired in a giant war in the Middle East, just like Dick Cheney.
And all along, you'll pretend you were against war as you do it endlessly.
I have my credits in the Zhank, but that is unbelievably prescient, as it turns out.
And yet, Stephen Miller vehemently denied that it was.
Here's what he said.
Jank, I don't know how I can be more clear.
Trump will end and prevent war in the Middle East.
He wants peace.
Harris and her neocon cabinet want war, war, and more war.
To call that fraudulent, a fraudulent campaign is to dramatically understate the case.
They ran on a platform, centrally, not ancillary, centrally, of swearing that not only would they not start wars like this, that only Kamala Harris and the Democratic Party would, her neocon cabinet.
And every neocon on the planet today is cheering Trump because he gave them what they've long most craved for Israel's interests for as long as I can remember.
Here was Trump over the years predicting that Obama, because he's such a weak man, such a poor negotiator, so desperate to find a way to distract from his own failures, that he would start a war with Iran.
Trump in 2011, in order to get elected, Barack Obama will start a war with Iran.
Trump in 2012, Barack Obama will attack Iran in order to get reelected.
Trump in 2013, I predict that President Obama will at some point attack Iran in order to save face.
Trump in 2013, remember that I predicted a long time ago that President Obama will attack Iran because of the inability to negotiate properly.
He's not skilled.
President Obama didn't start a war with Iran.
He very carefully and with great difficulty negotiated a very arduous nuclear deal that whereby Iran agreed to very invasive inspections of the kind no other country agrees to, including obviously Israel, which doesn't even admit it has a massive nuclear arsenal, let alone anyone inspect it.
Iran agreed to very invasive inspections at all the facilities, including the ones Trump bombed last year.
Even hawks about Iran, about Iran's nuclear program, acknowledged the bipartisan Congress did, that these inspections were working, that we knew what Iran was doing.
We had 24-hour, 24-7 surveillance of them.
There was no movement toward a nuclear weapon.
But part of what Trump promised to do in exchange for Sheldon Adelson's money in 2016, and remember, Trump mocked Marco Rubio because Marco Rubio was the Edelson's candidate at first.
And Trump said, oh, the reason Sheldon Adelson is giving Marco Rubio millions of dollars is because he knows he'll be a puppet of the Edelson agenda.
And he's right, Trump said.
Turns out no human being has ever served the Edelson agenda more than Trump.
And just to be clear about the Edelson agenda, Trump himself said last year that the Edelson agenda was that nobody in Trump's first term visited the White House more than Sheldon and Miriam Adelson.
Miriam Adelson is an Israeli.
She was born in Israeli.
She was in the IDF.
She was in Israeli her whole life.
She only became an American when she married Sheldon Adelson, who was a multi-billionaire.
Sheldon Adelson said his primary cause was Israel.
He said he regrets that he enlisted in the U.S. military and not the IDF.
And Donald Trump said that they would come to the White House more than anybody else and only ask for one thing, and that was for his things for Israel.
And he would always give them that.
Whatever they wanted, he gave them, he said, and more for Israel.
And last year, Trump went to Israel to speak of the Knesset.
And playfully, but very revealingly, he said, oh, there's Miriam Adelson.
Look at her sitting there with her $60 billion in the bank.
I once asked Miriam, hey, Miriam, who do you love more?
Israel or the U.S.?
If the two were in conflict and you had to choose, who would you pick?
And he's like, gosh, he didn't want to answer.
That tells me it's Israel.
And of course, it is Israel.
And the Edelson money went to Trump in exchange for his promise to withdraw from the Iran deal that neocons and Israelis always hated, even though it was working.
And you can draw a direct line from that to the war that we have now.
Obviously, Miriam Adelson also wanted a war with Iran as part of her many hundreds of millions of dollars that she poured into Trump's campaigns over the years, including in 2024.
And now she's getting that as well.
This is the Edelson agenda that Trump mocked Obama for doing, even though he didn't, for Rubio, for probably would have done had he got elected.
But now Trump was the one who got elected and is the one with the Edelson money and is pursuing that agenda as aggressively as possible.
Now, I don't think it's a surprise that the people who are celebrating this are Israel's most ardent loyalists.
Here's the pro-Israel Zionist billionaire Bill Ackman, who also poured huge amounts of money into Trump's campaign, who could barely contain himself when he learned that Trump had launched a regime change war against Iran with Israel.
Trump's Motive War00:04:03
He said this, quote, President Donald Trump will go down in history as one of the greatest and most consequential presidents we ever had.
God bless our nation, our military, and our president.
Let's all pray for our troops and risk their life who risk their lives on our behalf, on the behalf of all of us, so we can look forward to a world where evil is eliminated and good prevails.
What we do in life echoes in eternity.
Not sure what he means by what we do in life.
Bill Ackman is not fighting anymore.
Bill Ackman has never done anything, but engage in predatory capitalism and crony capitalism and enrich himself with many billions of dollars in exchange for having created nothing for anybody.
So when he's saying there are these troops who risk their lives to give us so much, I don't think it takes too much guess to know which country he's describing.
Here's Lindsey Graham, who just boasted of the fact that he's in Israel every two weeks.
And this is what he said this morning.
As I watch and monitor this historic operation, I'm in awe of President Trump's determination to be a man of peace.
War is peace.
But at the end of the day, evil's worst nightmare.
Well done, President, Mr. President.
Now, I don't want to give too much time to the idea that we're there to free the Iranian people.
I have an article, new article on my sub stack that I published very early this morning, analyzing this whole war once I saw it unfolding, once I saw what President Trump said, which I encourage you to read if you're really interested in that deep analysis of this issue.
I read another one a few days ago comparing the buildup to the war in Iran to what would happen in what was said in Vietnam and Iraq and Syria and Libya and how basically they're exactly the same.
No American president has ever fought a war to free the world's oppressed people or to bring them freedom of democracy.
That's sometimes the pretext.
That was the pretext for the Iraq war.
That was the pretext for the Vietnam War, the war in Libya.
The United States doesn't fight words for that.
The United States has fought far more wars, has engineered far more CIA coups to remove democratically elected governments and replace them with friendly tyrannies than it has the other way around.
Trump's favorite regimes are the planet's most tyrannical, the Saudis, the Egyptians, the Emiratis.
We have close U.S. allies all over the world that are the most dictatorial that we support and prop up and keep in power.
The ones I just named, Rwanda, Uganda, so many others.
Trump's national security strategy that was just released for 2025 at the end of 2025 in December explicitly says we're no longer going to pretend to care whether countries in the Middle East offer democracy or not.
They have their own traditions, their own ways of doing things.
We're going to respect those.
We're not going to lecture them or badger them because Trump's favorite governments are ones that are undemocratic and repressive.
So to say that you have to be naive and ignorant to then turn around and see all this and believe, oh, Trump said that, and he did say this, he told the Washington Post this, my main motive in this war is to free the Iranian people.
To say that you have to be naive and ignorant to believe that is to put it as generously as generously as I possibly can.
Whatever the motive is for this war, it's not that.
And it's not going to result in that as a result.
Here's Lindsey Graham.
I showed you Lindsey Graham.
All right, let's look at what President Trump today said.
This is his eight-minute address.
This is really the root of the matter.
This is Trump, in his own words, announcing the start of this new war.
Again, he didn't go on prime time and announce it.
He dropped a video in the middle of the night on Friday, Saturday morning, middle of the night from Friday night to Saturday morning, announcing this war.
No congressional approval, no anything.
And here's what he had to say.
Trump's October 7th Joke00:13:03
The United States military began major combat operations in Iran.
Our objective is to defend the American people by eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime, a vicious group of very hard, terrible people.
Its menacing activities directly endanger the United States, our troops, our bases overseas, and our allies throughout the world.
The only thing that actually is endangering our troops and our bases overseas is when we attack Iran.
U.S. troops have died because they were deployed in the Middle East to defend Israel from attacks in the region as a result of what they were doing to Gaza, what they were doing in bombing Lebanon and Syria and Yemen and Iran.
And U.S. bases are now under attack again.
Not because Iran unilaterally goes and attacks them, but because they do so only as retaliation when we attack Iran.
That's what's creating the danger in the region, our U.S. and Israeli attacks.
For 47 years, the Iranian regime has chanted death to America and waged an unending campaign of bloodshed and mass murder, targeting the United States, our troops, and the innocent people in many, many countries.
Why has Iran, why have Iranians chanted death to America since 1979?
Why is that day significant, that year significant?
That's because in 1954, and this may seem like ancient history, but when you live in countries where the U.S. goes and engineers a coup in your country, you don't forget it in a decade or a year, a decade, or even many decades.
I've talked before about this.
I've lived in Brazil for 20 years.
In 1964, the U.S. came in and worked with right-wing generals in Brazil to overthrow the democratically elected government in Brazil that was not communist, but was too center-left for the taste of the Johnson and Kennedy and Johnson administrations.
They started engaging in left-wing politics that they had ran on, like land reform and rent control.
But at the height of the Cold War, any perceived movement to the left was a perceived move toward Moscow that the United States wouldn't tolerate.
And the United States gave them warnings, first Kennedy and then Johnson, either stop these policies that you promised the Brazilian people you would implement to help them economically, or we're going to drive you out of office.
And finally, they did.
In 1964, they worked with the Brazilian generals.
They engineered a coup.
They drove the elected president into exile.
And for the next 21 years, Brazil suffered under an extremely repressive, tyrannical military junta, a military regime that the United States and Great Britain supported and propped up and trained to torture, to kill dissidents who were in exile.
They were killed, journalists, et cetera.
All the standard horrors, not nearly as horrible as in other places where we did the same thing, like in Indonesia or Iran with the Shah of Iran or in Argentina or Chile, but very similar.
And to this day, if a Brazilian politician picks up the flag of anti-Americanism, it resonates with people because nobody wants that.
Nobody wants foreign countries attacking and invading and dictating the internal affairs of your country.
Even if you dislike the government that they're attacking, you unify against the external attacker, as happened in 9-11 with President Bush.
President Bush was hated by half the country.
The perception was he and Dick Cheney stole the 2000 election.
And all of that disappeared on 9-11 from the perception that we were attacked by a foreign power.
And that's true in every country.
So in 1954, we did that to Iran.
We overthrew their democratic government.
And then the Shah of Iran reigned in Iraq, in Iran, rather, in Iran for the next 25 years until there was an Islamic revolution.
And so of course they hated the United States.
The United States was the country they rightfully blamed for having imposed very brutal, bloody, violent dictatorship on them.
The solution, when we see those things, is not, oh, let's keep interfering more in those countries.
Instead, it's to, why don't we stay out of those countries?
Why don't we not fight wars unless countries are actually attacking us?
The idea that Iran chanted death to America in 1979 and continues to this day too as a chant that they took American hostages 27 years ago, 47 years ago, rather, in 1979, which is Trump is about to cite, or backed Hezbollah attacks in the early 1980s.
Anyone actually think that's a cause for war today?
Among the regime's very first acts was to back a violent takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, holding dozens of American hostages for 444 days.
in 1983 iran's proxies carried out the marine barracks bombing in beirut that killed 241 american military personnel in 2000 they knew and were probably involved with the attack on the you I just want to stop here and just address a couple things in the chat.
Somebody corrected me and said the coup was in 1953 of most of the Iranian Democratic elected president.
True.
There's a comment here.
And this is so illustrative of how war propaganda works.
This person says, I'm Brazilian.
My parents, friends, parents, and everyone I know out of Sao Polo and Rio is glad for that intervention.
The noise about the so-called dictatorship in Brazil is much bigger than the fact it's actually illegal in Brazil by consensus to praise that military dictatorship.
That's how overwhelming the consensus is that that was a dark time in Brazilian life.
But this is what happened.
You get people you parade like, hey, here are some Iraqis, Ahmad Chalabi and other exiles.
And they're here to say, oh, we want the United States to come and bomb our country.
We hate the government.
We want the U.S. government to remove it.
You'll be welcomed as liberators.
Everyone hates the government.
We'll be grateful for you.
I had so many people appearing on the internet two months ago saying, Venezuelan here, we want the government, the U.S. government, to come and kill our leader and start a war in Venezuela, a civil war.
Iraqi here, in that article I referenced earlier this week in Substack, which is still up if you want to read it, they had CIA fronts that were Vietnamese groups, South Korea, South Vietnamese groups, who would form and these are people who were exiles.
They hadn't been in South Vietnam for decades.
They would say, hey, South Vietnam, South Vietnamese here.
We want the U.S. to go fight an endless buddy war and kill millions of people in our country because we hate the government of Ho Chi Minh and we want to be protected.
This is a very common tactic.
Not saying there aren't such people.
In every single country on the planet, literally, including the United States, you can find people who say, I hate my government so much.
Trump is a fascist.
Our government is repressive.
We want a foreign power to come in and liberate us.
It doesn't mean it's representative of the majority of the country.
And even if it is representative of the majority of the country, the fact that a majority of people in another country across the other side of the world want the United States military to go and fight and invade and have a long-bloody war to fix or change their government doesn't mean the United States ought to do so.
I thought that's what America first meant.
That the resources of the U.S. government are put into protecting the lives of the American people, improving the lives of the American people, not bringing freedom and democracy to Iran because you have a few Iranian women who are very well trained in how to speak in front of a camera in English saying, oh, no, we want this.
All Iranians want this.
We went through exactly that with Iraq.
Here's the rest of what Trump said.
USS Cole, many died.
Iranian forces killed and maimed hundreds of American service members in Iraq.
The regime's proxies have continued to launch countless attacks against American forces stationed in the Middle East in recent years, as well as U.S. naval and commercial vessels and international shipping lands.
It's been mass terror, and we're not going to put up with it any longer.
From Lebanon to Yemen and Syria to Iraq, the regime has armed, trained, and funded terrorist militias that have soaked the earth with blood and guts.
All right.
If you believe this long, dreary history of all the crimes Iran has committed over the last 46 years, of all the reasons they've threatened and menaced, if you believe that's the reason why this war is justified and necessary, why wasn't this part of the campaign?
Why didn't Trump campaign on this speech?
Nothing has changed in the last year.
Why didn't Trump campaign on a pledge that we are going to start a war in the Middle East with Iran, with Israel, to remove the Iranian government and bring regime change and freedom and democracy to Iran so that Americans could have voted on whether they wanted this war or not?
Americans had the opportunity in 2004 to re-elect George Bush or not in the middle of the Iraq war.
Why didn't Americans have the opportunity to vote for a president who intended to start a war like this?
They said the opposite.
They said Kamala Harris is going to start wars like this.
They said Kamala Harris is going to start new Middle East wars.
We're not.
I showed you all of that.
So if what Iran did in 1979 and 1980s and 1990s and the 2000s means that we now have to go and remove their regime through a massive new war that we started with Israel that Trump himself, as you're going to hear, says very well may result in the deaths of American service members and casualties we endure in caskets and bodybuilds coming back to the United States.
Why didn't he say any of this in 2024?
Was he unaware of this history?
This is why I say this whole campaign was a fraud.
If you're somebody who believes that this war is justified, you should be angry that Trump didn't campaign on it.
And it was Iran's proxy, Hamas, that launched the monstrous October 7th attacks on Israel, slaughtering more than 1,000 innocent people, including 46 Americans, while taking 12 of our citizens hostage.
It was.
Oh, so now October 7th is the reason we have to go to war with Iran?
That also was 2023, leaving Trump plenty of time in 2024 to say we have to go to war with Iran because they did October 7th, which is a joke that they did October 7th.
But even if you want to believe that, and these 46 Americans that they killed, these were almost entirely people who were American citizens who went not to fight for the U.S. military, but went to fight for the Israeli military.
You may recall the last American hostage, Eden Alexander, the last live American hostage that Trump so heroically liberated, was actually an Israeli citizen who went back to New Jersey for like a week to a parade filled with Israeli flags, went back to Israel, went back to fight in the IDF.
He was taken hostage by Hamas when he was in a tank fighting in active duty in uniform for the Israeli military.
So when our own citizens go and fight for Israel or the Israeli military and they get into a war and American soldiers who are fighting for the Israeli military are killed, that now becomes our war.
We have to go and avenge those deaths.
If I go tomorrow and I join the Brazilian military and Brazil goes to war with Argentina and I get taken or killed, is it now the role of the American government to go avenge my capture or death by going to war with Argentina?
Because I decided I wanted to go fight in a foreign military in a foreign war?
I do appreciate that Trump is getting closer and closer to admitting that Israel is the reason we're fighting this war because that is the reality.
Brutal.
Something like the world has never seen before.
Oh, yes.
The world has never seen anything like October 7th before.
Just absolutely nothing on that level of barbarism or savagery.
700 whole Israeli civilians killed.
Another 500 or 600 active duty soldiers.
Nothing ever like this.
The scale of the massacre was, I mean, not since the Holocaust.
And then we just watched like two and a half years of the Israelis evaporating almost all of Gaza.
And we're supposed to believe that this attack on Israel is something unlike we've never seen, that we now have to go avenge with a major war of our own, which is something you believe only if you believe that Israeli lives are more valuable than any other life, including American life, which is what a lot of people who are cheering for this war actually believe, including many of Trump's most important donors and advisors.
Iran is the world's number one state sponsor of terror and just recently killed tens of thousands of its own citizens on the street as they protested.
It has always been.
Hundreds of thousands, hundreds and hundreds of thousands.
Why Never Nuclear?00:15:40
Why not that?
Hundreds and hundreds of thousands of protesters.
What do you think happens in a protest in Saudi Arabia or Egypt or the United Arab Emirates or Rwanda or Uganda or any of the other countries the United States pays for to keep in power?
Do you think those protests are honored or do you think they're slaughtered en masse and gunned down?
We don't care about that.
That's the pretext for the war.
That's not the reason we're going to war.
If it were, there'd be a long list of other countries at least as repressive, if not more so, than Iran, which unlike Iran, we actually keep in power actively through our money and our military.
It's been the policy of the United States, in particular, my administration, that this terrorist regime can never have a nuclear weapon.
I'll say it again.
They can never have a nuclear weapon.
That is why in Operation Midnight Hammer last June, we obliterated the regime's nuclear program at Fordot, Natance, and Isfahan.
After that attack, we warned them never to resume their malicious pursuit of nuclear weapons.
And we sought repeatedly to make a deal.
We tried.
They wanted to do it.
They didn't want to do it.
Again, they wanted to do it.
They didn't want to do it.
They didn't know what was happening.
They just wanted to practice evil.
But Iran refused, just as it has for decades and decades.
They've rejected every opportunity to renounce their nuclear ambitions, and we can't take it anymore.
Instead, they attempted to rebuild their nuclear.
Right now on the White House website, and I would show you this if I were at all confident in my ability to do so.
Let's see, let's just experiment a little bit.
I'm going to show you this here.
There you can see on the White House website.
It's up right now.
This isn't like an ancient document.
Iran's nuclear facilities have been obliterated.
And suggestions otherwise are fake news.
This is in June, just like eight months ago.
The world is far safer after President Donald J. Trump's highly successful, decisive precision strikes against the Iranian regime's key nuclear facilities.
Monumental damage was done to all nuclear sites.
Obliteration is an accurate term.
So if that were the case, why are we back eight months later hearing that we have to go and do a bigger war this time with Iran because of their nuclear program?
What was the point of quote unquote totally and completely obliterating it if somehow like magically it sprouted back like a bad case of weeds in your backyard within the next eight months?
Like what are they just like, did they excavate their facilities covered with miles of rubble from the B-52 bombers?
We were told in June there's no more nuclear program.
And we knew of course that we'd be back in months if that's what Israel wanted.
Hearing that, oh, we have to go to war again for Iran for Iran's nuclear program.
And of course, that's exactly what we're hearing.
Continue developing long-range missiles that can now.
Can we just stop and praise my ability at screen sharing?
I don't think I've ever done it before live.
It was very bold.
And I executed it with incredible precision, more precision, apparently, than the Operation Midnight Hammer against Iran's nuclear facilities.
Threaten our very good friends and allies in Europe, our troops stationed overseas, and could soon reach the American homeland.
Just imagine how emboldened this regime would be if they ever had and actually were armed with nuclear weapons as a means to deliver their message.
For these reasons, the United States military is undertaking a massive and ongoing operation to prevent this very wicked, radical dictatorship from threatening America and our core national security interests.
We are going to destroy their missiles and raise their missile industry to the ground.
It will be totally, again, obliterated.
We're not talking here about Iran's nuclear missiles.
We're talking about conventional ballistic missiles, ones that most countries have in their military that are important defensive weapons for retaliation.
These were the weapons that were used to, according to President Trump, hit Israel very hard last June when Israel attacked Iran.
I understand why it's in Israel's interest to try and obliterate their ballistic missile program because those can actually reach Israel, even though Iran has never demonstrated the propensity to attack Israel without first being attacked.
Those missiles can't reach the United States.
And even if they could, I think Israel is a far more, is a regime far more accurately described as an apocalyptic, religiously fanatical cult of doomsday fanatics that would risk blowing up the world than Iran has ever been.
Iran has shown great restraint in trying not to make wars escalate in negotiating deals.
The idea that that's out of nowhere they're going to start a war with the United States that they would know would result in their nuclear annihilation is absurd.
North Korea is far more likely to do that, but of course we can't go and have a war with North Korea because they have nuclear weapons.
We've taught the world that the only way to be safe from Israeli and American aggression is to go and get nuclear weapons.
We've incentivized everyone in the world to go do that.
But we're now starting a war to obliterate a conventional weapons program that cannot harm the United States, but can only reach Israel because it's a war for Israel.
We're going to annihilate their Navy.
We're going to ensure that the region's terrorist proxies can no longer stay by the region or the world and no longer use their IEDs or roadside bombs, as they are sometimes called, to so gravely wound and kill thousands and thousands of people, including many Americans.
And we will ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon.
It's a very simple message.
They will never have a nuclear weapon.
What does annihilating Iran's Navy have to do with any of this?
And by the way, I want to just show you.
I think I don't have it, but I will just represent to you that I did have it and it is very true that Iran has already closed the Strait of Hormood.
So we're talking here about a major geopolitical crisis that could cause immense suffering geopolitically and economically to the American people, to the entire global economy.
And for what?
We don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon.
Therefore, we're going to annihilate their Navy and obliterate their conventional ballistic missile program.
The reason this makes no sense is because President Trump isn't telling the truth about the real reason for this war.
And you'll notice he's not even telling you what the aims of the war are.
Okay, we're not going to let them have nuclear weapons.
We already obliterated their nuclear weapon program, according to President Trump himself, just eight months ago.
And if that were the war aim, all we would have to do, presumably, is bomb whatever nuclear facilities somehow magically re-sprouted.
But what else?
What else?
What are the war aims?
How are we going to know when the war is done?
This regime will soon learn that no one should challenge the strength and might of the United States armed forces.
I built and rebuilt our military in my first administration, and there is no military on earth even close to its power, strength, or sophistication.
My administration has taken every possible step to minimize the risk to U.S. personnel in the region.
Even so, and I do not make this statement lightly, the Iranian regime seeks to kill.
The lives of courageous American heroes may be lost, and we may have casualties.
That often happens in war, but we're doing this not for now.
We're doing this for the future.
And it is.
You know, first of all, I just want to say that it makes me sick to listen to an 80-year-old man in any context who has never bothered to go to war, had every opportunity to go to war.
Again, Trump was in his 20s in the 1960s during the Vietnam War, prime fighting age.
Huge numbers of people are being drafted against their will.
They went and fought and died.
Trump used whatever connections and deferments like Dick Cheney and Newt Gingrich and so many other tough guys to avoid war.
And then he just so casually says, Yeah, probably going to have some Americans dead.
Just so happens in war.
We're doing it for the future.
European monarchs in the 17th, 18th, 19th century, even into the 20th century, were expected.
If they wanted to start a war and ask people to go to war and risk their lives to die in a war that they claimed was vital to the national interest of that country, they were expected to go to the front lines to put their children on the front lines, to put themselves on the front lines.
And they did.
It's a long tradition in European royalty and European monarchies and European aristocracy.
We do the exact opposite.
We now have, as Trump himself said, by the way, before the election, a class of warmongers who so casually send other people to war who love war, who get excited by war, who love to give speeches about how tough they are from war because they themselves are never at risk.
Their families and sons and daughters aren't the ones who go and fight.
We have this separate professionalized war class, generally from the working class, the lower classes, economically, who go and fight.
And wealthy people, old people sit in Washington and send them.
And then also, he has the audacity to say the reason our troops are going to be in harm's way is because Iran is a government that seeks to kill.
Who's the one who just started the war?
Who's the one bombing the shit out of Tehran and multiple other Iranian cities, killing civilians, attacking all kinds of infrastructure?
Israel has done that in seven or eight countries.
Israel has destroyed Gaza in a crime that many, if not most, experts in genocide, including Israeli and Jewish ones, international tribunals say is genocide.
The U.S. paid for it, financed it, fought for it, enabled it under two successive presidents.
And now we're going to be told, oh, Iran is evil because they like to go kill.
It's a noble mission.
We pray for every service member as they selflessly risk their lives to ensure that Americans and our children will never be threatened by a nuclear-armed Iran.
We ask God to protect all of our heroes in harm's way, and we trust that with his help, the men and women of the armed forces will prevail.
We have the greatest in the world, and they will prevail.
To the members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard, the armed forces, and all of the police, I say tonight that you must lay down your weapons and have complete immunity, or in the alternative, face certain death.
So, lay down your arms.
You will be treated fairly with total immunity, or you will face certain death.
Finally, to the great, proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand.
Stay sheltered.
Don't leave your home.
It's very dangerous outside.
Bombs will be dropping everywhere.
Where will bombs be dropping?
Everywhere.
We're going to liberate the Iranian people by dropping bombs everywhere they live, everywhere they are, everywhere their kids are, everywhere they exit, everywhere.
We're going to be dropping bombs with Israel.
That's how we're going to liberate the Iranian people.
And even here, is Trump promising regime change?
Is he vowing to fight a war for regime change?
Is he just telling the Iranians to somehow go do it themselves?
And what does the aftermath of that look like?
No one knows.
And the reason nobody knows is because there's been no discussion of this war.
There's been no interrogation of Trump officials about what this war is.
We know that Israel wants the war, and that seems to be sufficient.
Here's the end of this battle war cry: When we are finished, take over your government.
It will be yours to take.
This will be probably your only chance for generations.
For many years, you have asked for America's help, but you never got it.
No president was willing to do what I am willing to do tonight.
Now you have a president who is giving you what you want.
So let's see how you respond.
America is backing you with overwhelming strength and devastating force.
Now is the time to seize control of your destiny and to unleash the prosperous and glorious future that is close within your reach.
This is the moment for action.
Do not let it pass.
May God bless the brave men and women of America's armed forces.
May God bless the United States of America.
May God bless you all.
Thank you.
So inspiring, so courageous of President Trump.
So there's no other president with the balls to do what I just did.
I sent other people's families, other people's kids into a war that they may die in.
For what?
For what?
For reasons that I can't even say.
We don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons.
Okay, that's established.
They weren't getting nuclear weapons.
They had already said a hundred times in this year alone that they would sign agreements where they have no right to acquire nuclear weapons.
They would never get nuclear weapons.
They would agree to inspections and monitoring of whatever the kind that we wanted to ensure they couldn't.
So what else is this war for?
We're going to annihilate their Navy to what end?
It could just be that we want to destroy the country and put it into a situation unlike, not unlike Syria, where it's basically crumbling, there's no real defenses, and let Israel just dominate the region without the slightest resistance forever.
That's the only objective I can think of that's actually coherent, that aligns with what it is that we're doing, which again is what makes it a war for Israel.
This is a war for Israel.
I hope that we can at least be done with the talking point that oh, Israel never wants American men and women to go in harm's way to fight a war for Israel.
I hope this will be put an end to that because I think everybody can see.
Is there a single Israel loyalist, fanatical supporter of Israel who doesn't want this war?
I don't know of one.
Every single Israel fanatic, every single Israel loyalist, Bill Ackman and Mark LeBron, all of them, Ben Shapiro, on and on and on.
Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham, all are ecstatic over this war.
Why Israel Supports War00:04:08
I guess it could be a coincidence, but I don't think it is.
I don't think it's a coincidence that after vowing for years not to start New Mideast wars, saying that if you elect Democrats or you allow Kamala to win, that that's how you'll get New Mideast wars.
The United States goes and started a new Mideast war.
It happens to be against Israel's most formidable adversary, the one that Israel and its loyalists in the United States have for decades been trying to manipulate and cajole and bully and pressure the United States into starting for them.
That that happens to be the new war, the one against Israel's adversaries.
And we're going to hear that this isn't a war for Israel.
Let's not insult anyone's intelligence with this.
Trump was put into office through pro-Israel financing.
Miriam Middleson and Bill Ackman, on down the list.
Elon Musk is basically the only serious major donor whose primary issue isn't Israel.
And he's neutral at best on that topic.
He would never be an impediment.
And Trump has surrounded himself with people who have devoted their whole lives to Israel, who are constantly in Israel, who have wanted war against Iran.
Even though there was a big part of MAGA, because Trump led them to believe it, led by people like Charlie Kirk and Tucker Carlson and Rand Paul and Tom Massey and Marjorie Taylor Greene, the people being who are either dead or being driven out of the MAGA movement, who took those claims seriously and believed them.
And that's because it was such a central part of the American First Movement.
So whatever else is true about this war, whatever else is true about the Trump campaign, about Donald Trump, about JD Vance, about the MAGA movement, about the Republican Party and the revolution within it, all of that is a fraud, a complete and total fraud.
And it's not like I'm surprised.
It's not like I'm shocked.
I watched the first term and I saw, as I often pointed out to many people's anger, that Trump was in the first term the only president in decades not to get the United States involved in the new war.
That was very true and very real.
But you could see, and I talked about this a lot, the fact that President Trump was running out of desperation.
He needed to win to stay out of prison.
He was willing to do anything.
And the people who saw that desperation and that vulnerability were pro-Israel activists and donors and financiers who never supported Trump, but jumped on the train at the last minute into the last year and extracted all kinds of promises, one of which you're now seeing the manifestation of.
On Trump's legacy is a new war with Iran.
On JD Vance's legacy is a new war with Iran.
JD Vance is defending it.
And I hear people saying, oh, if it goes well, it's going to be a success.
What does go well mean?
Tell me what goes well looks like.
No Americans die and we magically get the Shah of Iran's fail son to just sleep in on the magic carpet and start governing Iran peacefully and democratically.
Anyone think that's going to happen?
The Republicans were headed toward destruction in the midterms.
All polls showed that.
The reason is clear.
It's because Trump's primary promise, which is to improve the material conditions and lives of the working class people in the United States, the middle class, even people poor, has been completely neglected in pursuit of things like bombing Yemen and Israel and Gaza and Ukraine and Venezuela.
Now, a war with Iran, the Epstein files, everything but the things they were told to expect.
The one thing he did that he deserves credit for is he closed the border.
And by saying he deserves credit for it, I mean he ran on that.
People wanted that and he did it.
But everything else, recreating jobs, reindustrializing the Midwest, revitalizing American manufacturing, none of this is done.
None of this is close to done.
And people are angry about it.
And now they're seeing yet another regime change war on the other side of the world against a government they don't fear, rightfully so, that they were told to expect only if Kamal Harris got elected.
And beyond the moral disgrace of this war, the dangers that it poses to the world, the number of people who are going to die is what I think is going to be the political suicide of Donald Trump and his movement.