Trump CRACKING DOWN On Scam Call Centers, India Is COOKED
Tate Brown rages against Indian call centers flooding America with scams, praising FCC Chairman Brandon Carr’s push to reshoring jobs and slapping tariffs on offshore operations while mocking India’s cultural "incompatibility." He pivots to immigration, demanding Afrikaner refugees over Congolese, calling them "white" and more assimilable—despite dismissing their global adaptability. Bacha Unger Sargon then argues Trump’s Iran crackdown isn’t regime-change but a strategic move to isolate China by controlling oil routes, contrasting it with Bolton’s failed Iraq-style interventions while ignoring GOP dissent as media-driven noise. The episode frames Trump’s policies as a working-class power play, where economic dominance trumps liberal interventionism. [Automatically generated summary]
They still text me every single day and I can't stop.
And it's driving me to the point of mania.
They're attacking me.
They're tormenting me at every turn.
But thankfully, some excellent news.
Brandon Carr from the top rope comes down and just yams on India.
The FCC is finally stepping in.
Enough.
No more scam calls.
Reshoring the call centers back to America.
America first.
Call centers.
Boom, we pick it up.
It's an American.
We're so back.
I'm very happy to be back with you guys.
This is my name is.
I tried to combine that.
It got really wacky and wild.
My name is Tate Brown.
I am your host here of the Timcast Noon Daily News Live Show.
I am Tate Brown here holding it down, as some of you would be familiar with.
That intro, and I'm very happy to be back with you on this beautiful, beautiful Thursday.
It is a wonderful day.
We are just outside our nation's capital.
It's a balmy high 50s with a little breeze.
It's very nice out right now.
And I am excited to take you from the morning to the afternoon on the Rumble Daily lineup.
We have some fantastic news for you today, obviously, with the lead being the FCC.
You know, everyone's talking about Iran and Epstein and all this, and they're missing the real important stuff.
We might finally be rid of these scam calls that have been tormenting me for my entire life, quite frankly.
I mean, it's literally been the bane of my existence.
And Apple, for like a year, there was about a year run where Apple would actually tell you if it was a scam.
It would say scam likely.
And that was really wonderful.
That was great, but that lasted like a year.
And then in the last two years, it seems like it's just scam call Balooza.
I don't even pick up.
If I don't have the number on my phone, I don't even pick it up anymore.
Do you know how sad that is?
Because, like, you look at old, uh, you look at old TV shows from the 90s and the 80s, and they would phone rings, boom, they're picking it up.
No questions asked.
Who knows who's on the other end?
I can't do that anymore.
I don't have the joy, it's been ripped away.
My into the inheritance of sort of the melancholy of just picking up the phone if it rings, and maybe it's a lovely woman on the other end.
I don't know, I don't know anymore.
Usually, I pick it up, it's an Indian, and it's getting worse now.
It's like an AI.
I pick up the phone, and it's AI Ray Romano talking to me, trying to sell me, you know, an extended warranty for my car, you know, or they're trying to reverse mortgage my house.
I don't even own a home.
I'm a Zoomer.
Why would I own a home?
So, it's just like I can't deal with it anymore.
And quite frankly, you know, a lot of people ask me, Well, why are you?
Why do you rough up on the Indians so much?
Why do you rough up on India so much?
Because I don't like India.
I think this is pretty obvious by now.
It's pretty straightforward.
Oh, well, Indian Americans actually are the best performing immigrant group in the United States.
They don't even take any welfare money either.
They're not controlling.
I don't, I don't care.
I don't like India.
Okay, I'll say it.
I don't like India.
I don't like India very much.
I know some really cool Indians, right?
Like, I, um, you know, like, um, anyway, but so, like, but the point aside, we got to really clamp down on this FCC.
The FCC's really got to clamp down on this car, but I'm going to read this.
This is from Fox News.
This is some fantastic news.
This is like this is really the first shots fired and the actual restoration of the United States.
This is beautiful stuff.
Trump's FCC.
This is from Fox News.
Trump's FCC aims to crack down on offshore call centers, illegal robocalls.
Chairman says, too many Americans have struggled to resolve an issue with the representative due to cultural and language barriers.
Finally, this is something I can get freaking fired up about.
Oh my gosh.
Let's read here.
The FCC will vote on a proposal to improve customer service at call centers by encouraging onshoring and strengthening accountability for certain U.S. businesses.
Chairman Brandon Carr announced, come on.
The FCC will vote on reforms that may encourage businesses to bring call center jobs back to the U.S. because Carr believes Americans get frustrated when they call a U.S. business and end up connecting with a call center located abroad.
The FCC will also explore ways to improve customer service at existing call centers, including a proposal to require call takers to be proficient in standard American English.
Finally, oh my gosh, and will address illegal robocalls that originate abroad by seeking comment on the targeted use or tariff of tariffs and bonds.
This was a quote from Brandon Carr to Fox News Digital.
Today, nearly 70% of U.S. business outsource at least one department, including customer service and call center operations to locations abroad.
As a result, too many Americans have struggled to resolve an issue with the representative due to a cultural and language barriers.
I feel so seen.
I feel so seen.
Thank you.
You could, the Trump administration could literally go to like, we could have, we could have a 30-year war with Iran for all I care.
We could send every single troop over there.
I'll go over there.
If it means when I call Verizon, an American picks up and they're, and they're helpful.
And I know what I'm talking about.
We can go to war with anyone.
We'll just go to war with China.
I don't care.
I will do whatever it takes.
You know, I will personally sign my life away to Benjamin Netanyahu if that means when I pick up the phone, an American picks up when I call Verizon.
Because, oh my gosh, I moved into this new apartment recently.
And the only option I had is Verizon.
So I do the, I go to Verizon.
I call them and this guy's like, whatever, trying to upsell me.
And I'm like, you got to stay focused on like what you want because they're throwing all these deals at you and everything.
I know what I want.
I want one gig of internet.
That's it.
You know, whatever the price is, that's what, you know, and they're trying to throw all these different sales at you.
I mean, it's literally like you're in like a gypsy camp.
That's what it feels like when you're on the phone with these freaks.
And so anyway, I finally get what I want after like cutting through all of his, you know, BS.
And so he's like, okay, well, we're going to mail you in the mail your router.
Like, what?
Okay.
Okay, that's fine.
And you can do like a self-setup.
And what you do is when you get your box, you're going to call Verizon and they're going to help you set it up.
And immediately he tells me this.
And I'm just like, it's over.
I'm never, I'm never going to have Wi-Fi.
I'm never going to have Wi-Fi.
I'm going to be stuck using my personal hotspot for the rest of my life because there's no way that Verizon call center is going to be able to help me do this because I know something's going to go wrong.
So anyway, like three or four days later, the box comes in the mail.
I set the router up, plug it in, Ethernet cable.
We're good to go.
Everything is perfect.
I wait like 10 minutes.
No Wi-Fi.
No Wi-Fi.
None.
Nothing.
I'm still on the hotspots.
And so I'm like, okay.
So I pick up the phone and I'm desperate.
I'm desperate.
I want I want to watch TV, you know, like I, you know, and so I pick up the phone.
I, and then an Indian, it's an Indian.
It's an Indian.
She, I, she, I can't, I don't know what she's saying.
She's making me do this thing where I press a button on my phone and it turns the camera on so she can like see what I'm seeing as if like she knows any better than I do.
And I look and she goes, okay, well, I think I will have to call a technician out to your house.
I'm like, that's it.
You invaded my phone camera just to tell me like you don't know either.
And you're going to send a phone to what was the point of this entire call center self-setup at breast.
Has anyone ever successfully set up their Wi-Fi using this like call center crap or you know the call them self-setup thing?
There's no way.
There's no way.
So they send a tech.
He's an American.
Boom gets set up in five minutes.
Thank you very much.
It was an issue with like the central box in the apartment.
But if it was an American on the phone, they could have told me that.
You know, an American that like knows what they're talking about.
They could have told me that, you know, and I don't even know if they would need to, you know, invade my camera to take a look at the back of the router.
So total nightmare.
So thank you very much.
We're going to continue to read here from Carr.
Overseas customer service centers also raise concerns about protecting consumers' personal information.
Foreign call centers have also contributed to the rampant influx of overseas scam calls, training staff that later use those skills to defraud customers.
Our proposal would require disclosure when calls are routed overseas, give customers the option to switch to a U.S.-based representative and add stronger safeguards for personal data, all while improving service and creating new economic opportunities here at home to further discourage illegal robo calls from abroad.
The item also seeks comment on the use of targeted tariffs or bonds.
Yes, to tariff India like 300,000%, please.
Can we do that?
Is that a tariff we can do?
Can we tariff them at 500 million thousand percent?
Is that possible, President Trump?
President Trump, if you can hear me, please put a $500 million thousand dollar tariff on India.
Please, this ain't this ain't your mama's India.
And you know what's crazy about India?
I'm gonna, you know, I'm gonna keep going here.
What's crazy about India is they didn't even have this bad reputation like 20 years ago.
Like 20 years ago, even you go back to like, you know, this, you know, the Beatles and like the 60s, and India was kind of seen as this like, ooh, it's kind of this sexy, kind of mysterious place.
You know, it's kind of like this mysticism to it.
And, you know, we're going to go over there and like really like discover ourselves and whatever.
And this was kind of the vibe they had.
Even going into like the early 2010s, you would hear kind of like the you know the Indian drum.
I don't know what it's called, the Indian drum.
You would like hear that in the background.
There was like a Selena Gomez song that had it in the background, Cold Play, Beyonce.
They all kind of had some like Indian flavor kind of running through the song.
That's as soon as they got on the internet, that all stopped.
I don't know if you noticed this.
Like we're going later in the 2010s, like 2016, 2017, 2018.
As soon as Indians actually got phones and we could like talk to them, that crap ended quick.
The little fixation we had with India where we romanticized a little bit, that ended pretty quickly.
Just a few of them hopped on Twitter and we're like, we're good.
Yeah, thank you very much.
And we see a few videos come out from India.
We're like, whoa, you know, I think we're all right.
So where was I?
Anyway, yes, let's he put this up.
Brandon Carr, Brendan Carr.
Look, I don't know much about him.
I don't know much about the FCC, but I think they're doing a great job if they're cutting down on these freaking scam foreign nonsense crap.
Brendan Carr here says, Americans get frustrated when they call a U.S. business and end up speaking with someone at a call center located in a foreign country.
That's firing me up just thinking about it.
I'm dead serious, by the way.
We can go to war with Iran if it means this.
I'm dead.
I'm dead.
That's how much I believe in this.
That's how much Maybe I'm being a little facetious, but foreign dealing with foreigners when I call, you know, customer service has a more negative impact on my life than war with Iran.
I'm just going to say, I'm just going to say it.
I'm putting out there.
You guys can get mad at me.
You can disagree.
But I'm kind of serious.
And this isn't to downplay Iran, right?
This is a big deal.
War with Iran.
I'm not happy about it.
Massive deal.
It is very disappointing.
And at the gas price, it's going to suck.
And just the lack of focus on domestic.
Like, I'm there.
I'm there.
This is really bad.
The survey situation.
But the call centers really have made my life like a living nightmare, probably about once every three weeks when I have to deal with these people.
I can't.
I can't do it.
I really can't.
I can't live like this.
I can't live like this.
Thank you to the FCC.
Language and communications.
Where's my mouse?
Here we go.
We're going to call customer service to figure out where my mouse is.
Language and communication barriers only make it harder for callers to get the results they want.
So the FCC is seeking comment on several ideas that can help, including, oh, we can submit.
Oh, we can, they're seeking comment.
Like we can help.
We have, like, we can throw ideas at them.
Facilitating the onshoring of foreign call centers.
I like that.
I'll tell you why in a second.
Requiring operators at call centers to be proficient in American standard English.
Yes.
Well, I think that might, you might struggle with Americans for that.
Anyway, further cracking down on illegal robo calls from abroad through the use of targeted tariffs or bonds.
The FCC's proposal focus on the call centers run by communication providers regulated by the FCC, and that could represent steps for the government to build on more broadly.
On a serious note, reshoring call centers provides a ton of jobs for Americans that are kind of in a tough spot.
And I don't mean financially.
I mean like logistically, it's difficult for them to like go into an office, but it's also difficult for them to take like a really intense remote job.
This is a really great solution here.
A fugitive Caesar, he makes a great point here.
Really brilliant proposal from Trump's FCC to take call center jobs away from India and bring them home to America where stay-at-home wives and mothers will be able to have good, comfortable jobs working from home.
I mean, because let's be honest here, these broads are always on the phone anyway, you know?
So we might as well make it, they might as well make a few bucks in the process and talk to a stranger about how to set up their Dyson Air app, you know?
You know, calling someone, you know, to tell them how to set up their air fryer, some elderly person, you know.
Why not?
You know, these these hoes, you know, they, they're always on their phone anyway, you know?
You know, so you might as well, you know, strap the phone to their ear and have them yammer on for a little.
I don't know.
I'm just saying this makes total sense to me.
Not to say that stay-at-home wives and mothers are hoes.
That was obviously a tongue-in-cheek joke.
Oh, it was a joke.
It's a joke.
Relax.
Jeez.
It was a joke.
I think women are wonderful.
I love four of them.
So this is great.
We love.
We love this.
This is great.
This could solve the birth.
Okay, probably not.
But this could help with the birth rate, you know?
Like, if these stay-at-home, if it's easier for a stay-at-home wife to make money that she can put into the pool so then the family has more money so then they can like think about having more kids I think it's brilliant.
That's like, oh, a penguin stranded in Antarctica.
Yeah, that's where they live.
What do you mean an Indian strand?
They should be stranded there forever.
I actually understand what they're saying because India is such a horrible place that even if you've like grown up there, just existing there, you still feel like you're stranded, like you've been abandoned.
So I actually, I think they're correct here in saying that.
No, good.
H-1B is enough.
H-1B should be like completely allocated.
It's like Western Europe and like Australia.
And there should be an extra level of vetting.
So like they should be allowed to come here, but they should also have like an entrepreneurial mindset like instead of like a backpacker.
Because I think we've had a little bit too much.
I mean, let's just be like, can we just be honest here?
I think we're all third worlded out.
You know, like I live in Northern Virginia.
I've kind of had enough.
I'm tired of like, you know, dressing this up and like, well, you know, they're just not assimilating properly or like they're so culturally different.
I wouldn't care if they were like Norwegian.
I'm just really tired of like the super foreign cultures, you know?
I've had enough.
Let's get some, like Trump said, Trump said it himself.
Would it kill us to take in some Danes, you know, or some Swedes or some Norwegians?
Would that really kill us?
What if we just allocate all the H-1Bs to, again, like countries that are not like scary, you know, countries that are like, you know, similar to us?
Can we do that?
Is that a crazy proposal?
Or we could just get rid of the entire program entirely.
But if like we can't, you know, if there's like some sort of congressional holdup, then let's just only allow countries that are like nice, you know, and pleasant places.
Can we just do that?
Is that, you know, is that a radical proposal?
I don't know.
Maybe it is.
Maybe I'm just, you know, freaking retard.
Who knows?
But Trump said back in 2010, I just wanted to bring this up.
This is interesting to me.
2013, September 5th, 2013, Donald J. Trump posts on Twitter, while everyone is waiting and prepared for us to attack Syria, maybe we should knock the hell out of Iran and their nuclear capabilities.
That's interesting.
You know, I was told, you know, reliably that Trump, you know, was completely apathetic about Iran and had zero concerns over their nuclear program until Benjamin Netanyahu whispered in his ear and said, hey, Don, you're my slave.
You need to go bomb Iran right now.
And then suddenly Trump, who again was borderline pro-Iran and had zero, you know, he was completely ambivalent about their nuclear program, all of a sudden, since Bibi and he's a slave, all of a sudden he changes his mind and says, yes, sir.
Oh, yes, sir.
And then bombs Iran.
That's what I was told.
That is what people were effectively saying to me.
And I would counter and I would say, okay, I don't like it.
I don't like the, I don't like the, I don't like the foreign intervention in Iran.
Really not a fan of it.
I think it's a bad idea.
But I didn't, it's not unexpected.
Trump has been pretty consistent on Iran and their nuclear program.
Okay, he could say said no new wars.
You know, whatever.
He was talking about these extended foreign quagmires, et cetera, et cetera.
2013, he's complaining about Iran's nuclear program.
He's 80 years old.
He's 80 years old.
He's from New York.
They just get really fired up about Iran.
Iran's like a very boomer thing to carry about, care about.
Sorry to get a little vitamin water down the hatch there.
I'm trying to say vitamin instead of vitamin to throw people off.
Trump's a baby boomer.
And if you look at polling, baby boomers are like really concerned about Iran for whatever reason.
So it is what it is.
But I just wanted to point that out that like Trump, again, this isn't like he just changed his mind in the last year or so and all of a sudden he like really cares about Iran.
He's been pretty consistent that he has a problem with Iran and their nuclear program.
So I just wanted to point that out.
There's a million statements, a million tweets from Trump saying something along these lines.
It is what it is.
It is what it is.
Let's get into the ref.
Let's talk about this before we get to our interview.
We're going to bring in Bacha Unger Sargon.
You guys, you know, friend of the show.
I'm sure you guys are familiar with her.
I'm going to ask her for her take on this whole Iran situation and see what she has to say.
I think it'll be quite interesting.
But before we get into that, we do have a little bit more news to get into.
This was hilarious.
David Beer, I don't know if you know him, he's the director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute.
Oh, wow, I can't think of anyone I'd want to hear from more on immigration than the Cato Institute.
I'm sure they're really passionate about border security and really passionate about the heritage of American identity and really passionate about preserving a national flavor of the United States.
I'm sure they wouldn't sell us out for a quick buck.
I'm sure they wouldn't sell us out for mass migration and undercutting American labor and cheapening wages.
They definitely wouldn't have that sort of bend whatsoever.
They certainly have a well-meaning, people-focused immigration policy that's very deeply concerned about the well-being of Americans.
What does David have to say?
Oh, he's talking about refugees.
Oh, interesting.
What's he have to say?
Just absurd.
Oh, David's not happy here.
This is just absurd.
Not a single refugee in the world was allowed to come legally except for white South Africans.
That's absurd.
That's not absurd at all.
It's about time, actually.
I think it's about time.
Because up until literally Trump's second term, your eligibility for being a refugee, the standard for being a refugee in the United States, was just that your country sucked.
Like that's what it took.
You didn't actually have to be under any real oppression.
You certainly didn't need to have any real threats against your life or your family's life.
Just as long as your country was a third world dump, you were allowed to come here.
That was what it took to be a refugee in the United States.
I'm not making that up.
That's like literally people in their refugee applications would say, if I go back to my home country, the standards in my country are so poorly that my life would be threatened or my family's life would be threatened.
I don't know if you're like a little new around here.
That's not valid.
That's not a valid reason to be a refugee, is that your country sucks.
Maybe fix it.
Maybe try to stay there and improve the conditions.
Or if you really are desperate to get out, there's legal pathways to leave.
You could try to do that.
No promises, certainly not with Trump in office.
When you think of groups that are actually, you know, being oppressed, the white South Africans come to mind, specifically the Afrikaners, because that's the specific group that's being permitted to come into the United States here: the Afrikaners.
There's a difference between the Afrikaners and the British South Africans.
The British South Africans make up about 33% of the white South Africans, and the Afrikaners make up 66%.
The Afrikaners are like the truly indigenous white population in South Africa.
They came in the 1415s, 1600s.
And they're the ones that receive the ire mostly from the black population in South Africa because these two groups have warred for a very long time.
The British South Africans, a lot of them are obviously very patriotic.
They feel very deep roots in South Africa.
I'm not questioning that, but they can kind of leave and go to Canada or New Zealand or Australia or Britain and fit in pretty seamlessly.
The Afrikaners don't really have anywhere to go.
They're very distinctly African.
They have white skin, but they're obviously can't really exist anywhere else besides South Africa.
That's just the reality of the situation.
Therefore, there's not really a country they can go to.
Certainly none that are bordering.
None of them are really keen on taking in Afrikaners.
They don't want to potentially damage relations with South Africa because the South African government wants to be allowed to punish Afrikaners with impunity.
They don't want to be held accountable for this because they're trying to settle a score, this ethnic gripe that black South Africans have with the Afrikaners.
So there's songs being sung by political parties talking about killing them and they're getting their land taken away from them.
And there's these farm murders going on.
And they're just killed a much higher proportion relative to their population than black South Africans are by black South Africans.
Like as far as the interracial crime goes, it's very rare that a white person in South Africa kills a black person.
That's the case in the United States, but it really is on steroids in South Africa.
It's really absurd.
By all accounts, the white South Africans are just not welcome in South Africa.
That's just the reality of the situation.
They're not welcome.
And if it were up to the black South Africans, if no one was looking, they would just kill all of them.
That's just the reality of the situation.
It's unfortunate.
It is what it is.
I wish conditions were better for the white South Africans.
I think maybe they should, you know, if they really feel a deep connection, I know how I feel.
I don't care how bad the United States gets.
I'm going to die here.
I'm not going to give up.
But it's hard for me to put myself in the shoes of a white South.
I don't know.
But I would assume a lot of them are really just keen on staying.
But, you know, when you have a wife and kids, things change a little bit.
So I understand that.
That being said, these people are very similar to us.
I don't know if you've ever met a white South African, an Afrikaner specifically.
Very similar to like a Midwestern or even a Southern American.
They're similar.
They're Protestants.
You know, they have similar ancestry, you know, coming from Western Europe.
They have a kind of a frontier culture, which is very similar to Americans.
Americans also have a frontier culture.
I would say, really, Americans and Afrikaners are the only two groups that truly have that frontier pioneer spirit still active within the population.
These are pretty seamless fits into the United States.
So it's a no-brainer for the Trump administration to accept, you know, boers, South Africa, white South Africans, Afrikaners.
It's a no-brainer.
They fit seamlessly.
They're net contributors, but simultaneously, they're actual refugees.
Like they're actually under threat in South Africa.
So I think if it were up to the Trump administration, they would accept no refugees because we're a little bit full.
We're not really in the condition right now to be accepting a lot of refugees.
White South Africans are net contributors.
They're, again, seamless fits.
They fit right in.
You don't even know they're there.
Besides their accent, you wouldn't even know they're there.
And a lot of them end up working on farms.
So, again, no-brainer.
But of course, the Cato Institute is freaking out about this.
They finally found an immigrant they don't like.
Or McIntyre says, absurdly based, yes.
Trump is far from perfect, but he's radically better on immigration than any president in my lifetime.
Again, this is just like shows that the Trump administration is not accepting the Cato Institute narrative on how immigration ought to be, the conventional GOP narrative.
They don't care.
They don't care.
So it's beautiful.
Oilfield Rando, he had a great statement here, and I think this is very, very accurate.
He says, We've brought 123,000 Congolese here using taxpayer money since 2012.
And these snivaling little traders of Cato are furious that it stopped and 1,600 South Africans came instead.
And I think that really hits the nail on the head.
It's such an infinitesimally small, I think I said that word correctly, small amount of refugees actually coming here.
And it really just takes the mask off of the whole immigration thing.
It's been obvious that immigration has been used as a weapon to make the United States less white since the 1960s.
It's just undeniable at this point.
And the fact that no one had a complaint, none of these Cato Institute people, none of these liberals, honestly, a lot of Republicans had zero problem with the refugee system when it was hundreds of thousands of Congolese and other groups coming here on our dime, coming here to be net negative contributors.
They would take extract from the government.
Didn't have a single problem with it.
As soon as we stop that and start bringing in white refugees, all of a sudden they freak out.
All of a sudden, they freak out.
Suddenly, it's evil, racist, et cetera.
You name it.
Every name's thrown at them.
That kind of tells you all you need.
That's like a serious mask off moment: all of a sudden, they really hate these specific refugees.
What's wrong with them?
Break down what about them you don't like, but that you do like about Congolese.
It's a skin, it comes out of the skin color.
They don't like white people.
That's just the reality of the situation.
They don't like white people.
That's the reality of the situation.
So, with that, we have to get into our interview with Baccia.
I'm very excited for this.
But before we do, we have a quick word from our sponsor, Prue Sander.
You see the headlines, read the stories, then the impact shows up in your own numbers.
Balances rising, fees piling up.
That's when it's time for PDS debt.
Minimum payments are designed to stretch debt out for years, and PDS debt has already helped hundreds of thousands reduce what they owe and take back control.
Whether you're struggling with credit cards, personal loans, or medical bills, PDS Debt has custom options to help you get out of any debt.
They go beyond the numbers to understand your unique financial situation and craft a personalized plan designed just for you.
There is no minimum credit score required.
They're here to help you save more, pay off your debt faster, and start putting money back where it belongs in your pocket.
They are A plus rated by the Better Business Bureau, boasting thousands of five-star views on Google.
But, you know, we're both kind of wonks here politicos.
And so we've been keeping an eye on.
There's a little situation going on in Iran.
I don't know.
I don't know if the audience is keeping tabs on us.
What is your assessment thus far?
There's so many different angles we can go, but I guess if you kind of give your reaction to this whole situation so far, I know it's a very big question to ask, but.
I'm almost struggling to talk about it because I think the achievement of the Trump administration is so enormous that you sound crazy when you try to explain it.
He's basically playing a massive game of risk, a global game.
And Iran is just the latest piece of that.
But to me, I mean, obviously getting rid of the Ayatollah Khomeini who wants every American dead, let's just be clear or wanted while he was alive is a noble, noble goal.
It's hilarious because the Democrats even will admit this.
They'll be like, well, of course, we support getting rid of him, just not now.
And it's like, I mean, you know, most goals that are, you know, objectively noble, you should do them whenever you can, right?
So that was like good in and of itself.
But to me, that's almost the sideshow in terms of the achievement here.
Because to me, this war is really about China and the way that the president has completely rewritten the entire global world order to put us back on top in a way that I did not think was possible.
And when you look at what he's done over the past year, you start to see how the puzzle pieces kind of came together.
So he started with the Panama Canal.
And I remember when he started talking about that, I was like, why does he even care about this?
Who was even thinking about this?
But you see now how that was the first step in reasserting control over all of the oil choke points across the globe.
He then did Venezuela.
He removed Maduro.
He left Dulcie Rodriguez in charge, which at the time, you know, all the liberals were like, well, why not give it over to Maria Machado?
She's the Western choice.
She loves the West.
No, he said, why would I do that?
So that the generals will all revolt?
No, I'm going to keep her there.
She's going to be unbelievably grateful to me.
We're going to work together to take all of this oil that, by the way, was, it wasn't just that China was getting all of this cheap oil from Venezuela, which it was at, you know, $15 below market rate a barrel, but that China had lent Venezuela $100 billion, which was being paid back in oil.
Now that oil is going to the free market at market rate.
So if China wants to buy it, it's going to cost it even more and it's going to have to buy it.
So it lost $100 billion off of that bet.
Like it just the sheer magnitude of the way in which Trump has humiliated the Chinese, who had spent the last five years telling everybody that the West was over, the United States is over.
You know, there's, you know, we're in a multipolar world now.
Trump was like, bitch, no.
This is our universe.
This is our century.
This is our world.
And now, of course, he goes into Iran.
He removes the Ayatollah.
He destroys their Navy.
He asserts aerial command in two days.
I mean, like, just the sheer magnitude of this is astonishing.
And now what he did was he isolated China from another 20% of its oil.
China is now telling all of its refineries, no exporting any gas or diesel.
Okay.
They're desperate.
They have not harassed Taiwan since February 27th, the first time in years that that has happened.
They can't afford to take Taiwan anymore.
They just don't have the oil to do it.
I mean, astonishing achievement on so many levels.
And it's just so funny to hear these ninca poops being like, this is Israel's war.
Like, it's so ridiculous.
This has nothing to do with, I mean, they're doing us a massive favor.
They're helping us a lot.
They killed the people who tried to assassinate our president, which in a normal universe would be like, thanks.
That's really nice of you.
Much appreciated.
But like the actual, the actual achievement here, it just goes so far beyond the massive achievement of eliminating the number one state sponsor of terrorism.
And I just one more point, which is people keep saying like, oh, this is another Iraq.
We're going to get bogged down.
That may be true.
I mean, we may get bogged down.
I would not support that.
I mean, if it goes on more than three weeks, four weeks, I will be very, very critical of this.
I don't think that is likely to happen, given everything I know about Donald Trump.
His foreign policy is not designed to make us poorer.
It's designed to make us richer.
And that's why I think this is going to be very quick.
And also why I think he's being so smart in refusing to say, well, we're going to insist on this kind of a government or that kind of a government.
If you notice, like he keeps saying, well, I will choose it.
Like, but I'm not going to tell you what I want ahead of time.
Make an offer.
You know what I mean?
Like, present somebody to me.
The Dulcie Rodriguez choice showed such a maturity that I think is 100% Marco Rubio to say, like, we're not here to nation build.
Like, the only nation we're building is us, you know?
But what we are here to do is make sure that you cannot traffic drugs and gangs into our country and make, you know, make your in our hemisphere create a landing spot for terrorists and for the Chinese and think we're just going to take that lying down.
So that's kind of how I'm thinking or how I'm seeing things.
It truly is just like, and again, it's like, I feel embarrassed to say what I really believe because, like, you're not supposed to talk about politicians this way, but just the we were in such decline.
And the watching the puzzle pieces of how Trump is thinking about restoring us as the only global superpower is just like, it's, it's breathtaking.
I do agree that initially, when you know, I saw the people gaming out the China containment strategy with Iran, and I was a bit skeptical at first.
And the reason for that, I guess, to kind of steel man the opposing position, not necessarily that Israel like control, because obviously that's not true.
Like the idea that Trump had a problem, didn't have a problem with Iran's nuclear program until like Bibi called that's ridiculous.
But in all fairness, I guess to steel man that position, you know, it has been a goal of the U.S. foreign policy for quite a long time now to overthrow the Iranian regime, to really clamp down on what on the really the entire Iranian apparatus with their proxies and these sorts of things.
And so that's why a lot of I think specifically MAGA supporters or MAGA loyalists that have been around for 10 years or so supporting the president, they kind of have two concerns.
It's one, this could be another Libya, more so than anything else.
But then B, I heard this talking point from quite a few people is they're just like, this really rewards a lot of the worst people in American politics.
Like, you know, your Bill Crystal types who have just been like salivating over war with Iran for quite a long time.
So I understand, and I actually am growing, growingly more sympathetic and convinced of the position that, yes, there actually is a bigger geopolitical play here.
But I also kind of understand what they're saying, where they're saying, well, this has been the goal of the pre-Trump GOP and by extension, the Democrats for a very long time.
And it is a bit concerning when we finally see it come into play.
Like it's just so funny how he managed one of Trump's superpowers is making his enemies behave in the most ridiculous, ridiculous, ridiculous ways.
You know, it's funny because people often say, Well, if you can't have one standard for your guy and another standard for the other side, the thing is, if your guy is so much better than you actually can, right?
Like, if John Bolden had been in charge of this, he would have sent in 200,000 American troops, right?
And Trump is like, no, we're going to do it from the skies.
So I just think when your guy has the priorities that our guy has, it really is a different concern.
Now, I just want to point another thing out, which is you hear a lot like, OMAGA is split over Iran.
Trump is losing MAGA on Iran.
All right.
We now have six polls that show support among Republicans for this is 80 to 90%.
And for MAGA Republicans, people who identify as MAGA, it's 90% plus.
So, you know, to me, it's like there's no freaking divide here.
That is just a liberal fantasy because they hate Trump.
There's like 90% of MAGA and then four podcasters.
And it's the same divide you saw over Project over Midnight Hammer.
The same divide, in my view, you saw over the Epstein files, which like, I agree.
You know, influencers make a shit ton of money off of this.
And so they're super into it.
The MAGA base doesn't care.
They have the presence back.
And even in the MAGA political world, you can see immediately which politicians spend way too much time on Twitter and which ones are just out there doing the work because the ones on Twitter are obsessively misreading these like four podcasters and Marjorie Taylor Greene as being like as having some sort of constituency.
And they really, really don't.
That's not to say that, you know, the president can, you know, the GOP can win the midterms without independence and independents don't like this war.
But if it's over soon, which I believe it will be, which I hope it will be, and if it's not, I too will have concerns with it.
They will come around to it.
You know, people really don't like military action before it happens.
But if it's quick and brutal and over soon, then they really come around to it.
I do just want to say, obviously, the six U.S. service members who we lost, it's unbelievably, unbelievably tragic.
But, you know, they're heroes and they're patriots and they died defending our grandchildren from a nuclear-armed Iran because no one would do anything about that.
And, you know, I cannot believe that Donald Trump would allow them to have died in vain.
Well, I do agree with Rubio's calculation, which was, look, if they were going to strike us, you know, and we kind of didn't know, we didn't have the intel or whatever.
We didn't necessarily know what specific time and moment they were going to strike.
We probably would have lost quite a few bit more servicemen.
So I actually completely agree with Rubio's analysis.
And I actually totally agree that it's really an online debate that's happening because this has been the problem from my point of view.
And I've been a Trump loyalist.
I mean, I was 14 when he came down the escalator for what that's worth.
But like I've always been a Trump guy, especially since I've been like politically damn you young people.
But it's so true that it's like a lot of I've seen this happening is they really almost over intellectualize Trumpism and MAGA.
And they try to like sort of bake in that it's a lot more of like a convoluted political overhaul than it is in some instances.
Like, yes, Trump has eliminated like six separate political dynasties.
But at the same time, what really is the bread and butter of Trump and MAGA is actually quite simple.
It's immigration and it's trade.
Those are like the two things that Americans, his voters, that really set him over the top, that set him apart from the field in the Republican primary.
It's immigration where he's calling balls and strikes on like the situation.
And it was trade where he was saying, like, look, the NAFTA and, you know, these different trade deals that we have have completely destroyed our manufacturing sector.
So I think as long as he's delivering on those two, that's where you're going to still get 90% support for pretty much every other action because that's how you buy political capital.
And again, even if I agree that if it goes beyond four weeks or if gas prices really shoot through the roof, you'll probably see those approval ratings change.
But I trust President Trump here.
I have some friends texting me who are just whatever.
They're kind of like mentally, I won't use the word, but they're getting tossed around by the algorithm.
They're like, well, if Biden did this or Obama did this, you would hate this.
And I'm like, yeah, because I don't trust them.
That's why, because I don't trust them to mop this up.
With Trump, I have some faith.
Again, it's like, aside if what my opinion is on if we should have gotten involved, it doesn't really matter.
We're in it now.
And so now I just have to sit back and like, you know, just kind of trust the let him cook here, for lack of a better word.
I think there's something to be said about letting the president cook.
And one more kind of point here is for you and me and for everyone in the sphere, we're expected to just have like nuclear hot takes ready to go.
You know, you got to have this really strong, hard opinion.
And when this all broke out, I'm like, I kind of just have to wait to see.
Like, you know, it's like, it's obvious there's a geopolitical calculation, but it's obvious there's a calculation on how we're going to deliver on domestic policy.
I just need to like wait and see.
Like, guys, can I get like a week to really see how this is like going?
You know, it's like, but, you know, it's tough in the game, I suppose.
Yeah, I think that question of credibility is extremely important.
You know, I'm like you.
I mean, I mean, I don't know if you agreed that I think we should have a complete moratorium on immigration for the next 10 years, like not as legal, illegal.
Like to the MAGA base, it doesn't really matter.
It's only elites, by the way, who make that distinction.
And he's the only politician who was willing to say that when both parties were like totally committed to open borders, you know, and that buys you a lot of credibility.
And I think also, you know, sometimes I'll like, you know, so I was on a different, oh, I was on my sub stack doing like a live last night.
And I explain exactly what we just talked about, how the president's foreign policy is really domestic policy.
Like those are not separate for him.
He's not like, oh, we're going to do adventurism, you know, and then like they're the one and the two sides of the same coin.
If he's doing something and you don't understand how that puts money in your pocket, just wait.
Like you said, wait a week.
You know, wait a month.
You'll see how it works out.
Right.
And I think that, you know, somebody at some point said to me, like, I wish the president could articulate what he was doing the way that you do.
And I was like, well, the reason I think I can articulate it is because I'm thinking about the person I'm talking to.
I'm thinking, okay, what are their like, what are their like priors?
What is the thing that's getting in between them and seeing things the way that I do so that I can address those things?
People who are good at doing that are not good at saying to 98% of the existing political elites and economic elites, like, screw you.
He just doesn't care because he has a very clear image in his mind about how to help the American people, how to bring back American excellence, how to bring back the American dream for the hardest working Americans who have been left behind and forgotten.
And you can see it on his face, like when he's at a rally and he brings up some waitress and he's like, explain how no tax on tips is putting money in your pocket, you know, or he, when he talks to the angel parents, like you can just see in his face, like he feels utterly identified with the American people who have been left behind and forgotten and abandoned and destroyed and disinherited by the status quo on both sides.
And I think that the people can just feel that.
Of course, if you're in the elites, you can't.
Like it's, it's, you know, they just see, it's insane how broken they are by him.
But I think that they've lost so much credibility and he's just accrued it.
Do you feel like there was any pressure on the Trump administration to conduct an operation in Iran removed from the geopolitical calculation that the Trump administration may be making here?
Just as far as, again, there are interests that would be interested in seeing Iran toppled.
And from, I mean, the Saudis, I mean, everyone.
This isn't like, when I say this, we're like, oh, you're talking about Israel.
I'm like, there's a lot of different people that really hate Iran.
Like it's not, the world doesn't revolve around Jews, but a lot of people like think that way.
And it's just, again, back to the people that are just mentally, you know what, by the algorithm.
It's unfortunate.
Do you think that there was sort of pre-Trump GOP pressure put on the Trump administration to conduct an operation in Iran?
Because you do see people like Lindsey Graham coming out and like, you know, high five and they're thrilled and they're saying, let's, you know, just rip it to the stud.
To me, that does, you know, concern me a little bit when I see that.
That, again, like a lot of really nasty people are fairly excited about this.
I think they probably would have told him to wait till after the midterms.
This is a huge political risk for the GOP.
And I think probably a lot of those people who are very thrilled about this probably would have urged him to wait until it was a less hazardous political time.
On the Israeli side, we know that the Israelis were very caught off guard by this and asked for more time to prepare because they just were a little bit surprised that he was like, no, we're doing this now.
So there was reporting that they sort of, when he sort of started expressing interest in like this moment and this time, asked for more time to prepare.
They started to get onto a war footing about two weeks ago, at which point he started to do his usual like, you know, psyop thing where he was saying like, no, no, we're negotiating.
And I think they were negotiating in good faith.
I think they did really want he would have been very thrilled for there to have been a nuclear deal.
But there was just nobody to talk to.
I mean, they were just lying to their faces.
And so I think that the pressure narrative is really off.
We know now that it was CIA, not Mossad, who knew that the Ayatollah and all of his friends were going to be kind of at that meeting in person, which precipitated the actual attack itself.
So I really don't see that at all.
Like in Midnight Hammer, I think that that was very much like the Israeli intelligence and then our capabilities with the B-2 bombers.
Here, this seems just much more like an American initiative.
And like we are much more likely to be the long-term beneficiaries.
For example, if Trump finds a Dulce Rodriguez in Iran, the Israelis won't be thrilled about that.
Like they would love to see like hardcore regime change.
They would love to see the protesters.
They would love to see some of the leadership in exile.
I don't think Trump is very interested in that at all.
I mean, he would like to see it, but not at the expense of America kind of winning the day here, not at the expense of stability.
And I'll just make one more point, which is that we now know that the Saudis publicly were out there saying don't attack Iran, but that privately they had joined with the Israelis to urge Trump to do this.
So, you know, a changing globe, a changing world, just, you know, the foresight when you think about how, like, in order to accomplish this, you would have had to have done the Abraham Accords.
So, we're talking five, like six years ago now, that he was sort of putting into place the building blocks of this new global world order in which the U.S. dominance is utterly, utterly unchallenged.
The one other point I would make is people keep saying, Well, if China is the real objective here, why isn't he out there bragging about it?
Well, he's got a big meeting coming up with Xi Jinping.
And I think that he's very good at working with dictators and understanding how they operate.
I think he's being very careful not to force the Chinese to get involved beyond what they would want to, because he has an idea for a way in which American dominance can actually translate into Chinese prosperity, but they have to play ball with us.
And so, he could be out there bragging about all the leverage he has over Xi Jinping right now, or he could just use the leverage in the meeting, right?
And I think he's chosen the latter, which of course flies in the face of the liberal fantasy of what his character is really like.
They're being very careful about what they're not saying right now.
Um, if you read between the tea leaves, yeah, absolutely.
I mean, with this geopolitical sort of pencil movement that's happening, yeah, that would be like retarded.
He wanted to come out and he's like, By the way, here's what I'm doing, and then she's like, What?
Meeting's off.
What's wrong with you?
Yeah, to your first point with Iran, I mean, again, this is, I agree.
It's like I think everyone in the region would love to see, you know, a regime change, a Western, you know, pro-Western person coming.
That's just not how they operate.
Like, Venezuela, like you, to your point, they keep Delsy in there because they know how long that would take and how much resource would mean to be expended for a full-blown regime change.
Same thing in Iran.
It's like, if you could just bomb this regime into moderation where they're just like, fine, okay, we'll sign whatever you want to sign.
And I'll just make one more point, which is people act like our endless, forever, counterproductive wars of regime change in the Middle East that cost us trillions of dollars and thousands of precious lives.
They act like the problem with that was the regime change part, not the endless warfare, trillions of dollars, thousands of lives, and it didn't work, right?
The counterproductive, right?
If a regime changes from a less potent, from one that's anti-Western to one that's more pro-Western, that's obviously a win.
If you didn't spend trillions of dollars, you lose tens of thousands of lives.
It's like people use this word as if it's somehow like this, you know, Voldemort, like this like word you can't say that has in and of itself.
So like that they, but the truth is the reason they do that, at least on the left, is because they would actually prefer Maduro for a Western person because they hate the West.
Although I do have to say, I think that it's probably more likely than it was in Afghanistan, just because they have this kind of unifying ancient civilization that's being destroyed by like the Islamic regime.
And so they have this history.
The question is, do they, like Venezuela, have a kind of middle class that has a muscle memory or a desire for democratic institutions?
It's not really a muscle memory.
I guess there was a monarchy before the Islamic regime.
So, you know, but you meet the people in exile and they do seem to sort of crave this.
They have this kind of unifying culture.
It's not like these sort of separate tribes that have been at war for like, you know, forever.
I think, you know, you can long for freedom for people, for women in other places of the world and also acknowledge the fundamental truth that you cannot give a people freedom.
They have to take it for themselves the way that we did, the way that our ancestors did here.
And I wish them the best.
I think they are so brave and I admire them endlessly.
And I just like, it's not our job to give them that.
And we cannot do it.
You can't fundamentally cannot give people freedom.
But I mean, to your initial point, I think, regardless of anyone's concerns with Iran or whatever, I think President Trump being in charge is the best case scenario.
I think everyone should be able to agree on that.
So I was wondering if you had any closing thoughts.
And more importantly than anything, where can people find you?
I just started like a few weeks ago, but I've been writing every single day.
So all of my thoughts, a lot of what we talked about here, I've published articles about that.
I'm on Twitter, but I'm trying to spend less time there.
I do have to say before I log off, I admire Tim so much because in that 9010 distinction we were talking about before between like the 10% who are influencers or podcasters who are against a lot of what the president has done versus the 90% of the MAGA, Tim is always on the right side of that.
Like he's just, even though he has all the same financial incentives, I guess, as the other podcasters, he never, ever gives in to that.
I've never seen him get audience captured.
And I'm so I'm just like endlessly grateful to him for his insight and his honesty and for being, he's like exactly like what journalists used to be, which is speaking truth to power rather than using your, you know, protecting power with the truth.
So all of which is to say, I thank you so much for having me.
It's been an honor.
I've really enjoyed this conversation and I love everything you guys are doing.
Tim's not audience captured to the dismay of the audience.
I think like Tim will take a position that everyone in the audience absolutely hates and he'll just like triple down.
And I love, I actually kind of love that because it's like master.
It's not even rage.
It's not rage baiting because he's like genuinely convinced of it.
But I think that's, I think it's great.
And that's why people tune in for a lot of reasons because he's going to give you a take that like no one else in conservative media is going to be saying.
Again, for better or for worse, I think it's great.
I think it's what makes him so successful among other reasons.
It's debauch's point.
Yeah, he's old school.
He's old school.
So new school in other ways, but old school in some ways.