Trita Parsi and Robert Barnes dissect the Iran war, arguing the Iranian regime's 18 million loyalists prevent quick collapse while President Trump faces an escalation trap akin to Vietnam. They condemn untrustworthy negotiators Witkoff and Kushner, noting Iran refuses talks after attacks, and identify Russia as the sole credible mediator. The discussion exposes alleged insider trading exceeding $1 billion and critiques Trump's fake ceasefire narratives, warning that ignoring independent experts like Parsi fuels dangerous delusions about regime change and U.S. military reserves. [Automatically generated summary]
Ladies and gentlemen of the interwebs, for a change today, we're starting straight off with a word from our sponsor, the Wellness Company.
I won't do it in the golf voice.
People, in 2025, cancer research global spend was $356 billion.
Big Pharma's cancer drug revenue increased by 70% in the last decade.
Meanwhile, cancer rates in people under 50 have doubled, whether it's because of the jabs, our lifestyles, the environment, one thing is clear.
We still don't have affordable or effective treatments.
Let me bring my face right in here so you can actually get myself in here.
Bada bing, bada boom.
People, that's when the wellness company comes in and helps you for your own health.
For example, the gold standard parasite cleanse, ivermectin, and mebendazole has shown has shown success in triggering cancer cell death, which wakes up the immune system and initiates an immune response while hindering blood supply to tumors and halting metastasia.
Unfortunately, mainstream doctors and pharmacies won't prescribe these medications.
At the Wellness Company, you can order it right from your home.
USA compounded doctor-prescribed ivermectin and mebendazole, designed to help your body eliminate parasites with the proven off-label cancer fighting benefits.
Each bottle contains 90 capsules, enough to complete four 21-day cleanses.
Fill out a quick intake form.
A doctor reviews it and your medical grade parasite cleanse arrives in a week.
The wellness company understands what medical freedom means.
Head over to twc.health forward slash viva.
Use code Viva gets you 60 bucks off plus free shipping.
TWC, the wellness company, or in official, what's it called?
The airline talk, TWC, tango whiskeycharlie.com forward slash viva will get you 60 bucks off and free shipping.
USA residents only and consult with a physician, obviously, for any medical advice.
Now, getting ready to take some shit early on in the day, although it's not early on in the day, it's in the afternoon.
We're going to talk Iran again and we're going to talk around this.
Yeah, I only listen to people's ideas.
Don't write people off based on tropes or whatever.
And what I'm noticing a lot online, by the way, Robert Barnes and I have talked about this in the past, but I've sort of pieced together the next layer of this.
Barnes said, you know, Candace Owens, agree or disagree with her, has made it more difficult for other people to have discussions about certain issues because people want to write off any form of ideological or political dissident.
And the way they get to do that now is to say, oh, you're just Candace.
You're just Nick Fuentes.
Therefore, I no longer have to deal with your ideas.
It's a very interesting thing that the tactic is being used right now in the exact same way.
The COVID jab pushers and the lockdown supporters and the mandate proponents were saying, oh, you're just a flat earther.
I don't need to listen to your thoughts anymore because I've lumped you with the flat earthers just because I disagree with you and I want to impose my belief system on you.
So if you're doing it, by the way, whatever you think about Candace Owens, because I've got my critiques of Candace as well, if you are lumping together anybody you disagree with in the Candace, because you think you get to write them off the same way they wrote off, anyone who is COVID skeptic as a flat earther, congrats.
Regime Change Escalation Trap00:14:36
You're no better than they were then and you should look in the mirror and reflect.
With that said, good afternoon, everybody.
How goes the battle?
Viva Fry, former Montreal litigator, turned current Florida Rumbler.
We're going to have another interesting discussion today.
We have on Trita Parsi.
Now, I was going to do his bio, but it was only going to consist of me, you know, basically going to AI to summarize it because it's amazing.
Quincy Institute co-founder, one of America's sharpest voices on Iran policy.
Whether you agree with him or not, I go back and I look at what people have said in the past and then determine how right or wrong they have been or those statements were.
Now, hold on, I want to bring this up because I was actually going to start the show with this when I was doing my homework this morning.
And I sent the link right here.
Here, I'm going to bring this up.
And then you're going to be able to decide whether or not you're going to rely on what treat.
Hold on, let me bring it in here.
We're going to bring this up, and then we're going to bring our guests for the day.
Here, this is from a little while back.
I got to get the volume down a little bit.
There's a significant risk that Israel will restart the war with Iran in the next couple of weeks or months.
And the United States risks getting dragged into that war once again.
If you're sitting in the United States, this is what's important to understand.
The U.S. is very likely to get dragged into the next war, but it's not going to be like last time.
It's a one-off, a bombing campaign, and it's over.
The Iranians are going to do everything they can to dispel the Israelis from the belief that Iran can be subjugated to Israeli military dominance.
So they will strike back much harder, faster than they did last time.
The Iranians have shown that their missile capabilities are far more extensive than was earlier believed, and that U.S. and Israeli air defense systems are not sufficient to be able to stop all of them.
And this also means that the Iranians may this time around strike at U.S. bases in a manner that they didn't last time.
Last time, as one Pentagon official said, it was a polite response because it was all about ending the war.
This time around, it's likely going to be much worse.
It's not going to be about ending the war.
It's going to be about winning the war.
And we know now that the Iranians have missile capabilities that can penetrate all layers of Israeli and American air defense systems and can lead to a large number of American deaths.
So we will once again have Americans coming home from the Middle East in coffins.
Now, I can't exactly get the date of that from that link right there, but you can listen to that assessment before this conflict started.
And now you can assess whether or not, regardless of whether or not you agree, whether or not the man is out in left field.
So without further ado, Trita, come on in.
Robert Barnes, come on in.
We're going to work our squares around here.
I'll take the Santa Square to block Alex.
I know, I forgot what show is that.
Hollywood Squares.
When Barnes gets in here, he's coming.
There he is.
Okay.
Trita, I didn't want to, I don't want to undermine.
What's the word I'm looking for?
I don't want to downplay your expertise.
People are going to come in here and say, well, I want to disregard him, so I need to know his credentials in order to determine whether or not I even have to listen to him before writing him off.
Tell us who you are, what your credentials are, and what makes you an expert in this region.
All right, you're putting me on the spot here.
I have been working in this space for more than 25 years.
I did my PhD at Johns Hopkins on the Francis Fukuyama and Briggs Zbik Brzezinski.
I wrote my dissertation on Iranian-Israeli relations.
I published the first book on that topic in 20 years in the United States.
And I traveled to both Iran and to Israel and did, I think, altogether 110 interviews with officials and people around power in both countries to better understand the strategic logic and thinking on both sides when it comes to that conflict.
And part of the reason I got a lot of attacks on me for more than 20 years is precisely because of what I revealed in my dissertation, which became an award-winning book called Treacherous Alliance, the Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States.
It didn't please the Israelis or the voices in Washington that are very favorable to them.
But I think it's ultimately proved to be quite accurate in terms of understanding the drivers of this, the calculations behind it, but also how this could have been avoided.
And to a certain extent, it was until it wasn't.
And I've also worked in Washington for more than 25 years, co-founder of the Quincy Institute, a think tank in DC that is favoring a restraint foreign policy, as it's called.
And prior to that, I was the president and co-founder of the National Iranian American Council, which was the largest grassroots organization of Iranian Americans in the United States.
You have a unique family history.
Your father managed to get persecuted by both the Shah and the Ayatollah regime before leaving.
The Quincy Institute, well named, my cousin John Quincy Adams famously said, do not go abroad.
America does not go abroad searching for monsters to destroy.
And then I always hear people responding by saying, but Barnes, that's a monster over there.
Like, apparently they didn't hear what he said.
But more broadly, I had talked about, like, I didn't think it was highly likely that the Iranian regime would collapse or have a regime change by taking up the Ayatollah, more like the opposite.
And partially just recognizing and respect not only the work you've done, but others have done.
But you combine Persian pride, Iranian nationalism, and Shia Islam.
And that doesn't usually lead to a combination of, thank you, invader.
Please take us over now.
How likely is it?
I still get it from some people on the right that are about in the same fantasy land that unfortunately I think our president is often occupying.
I had been warning people for several months that the president was, his chief of staff had told people don't share anything that he could interpret negatively.
Just give him positive news.
Apparently, this is happening now with the war.
We have fictional ceasefire negotiations going on.
A old friend of the show, Eric Hunley, thought it was real, thought that there was about the peace deal because he's listening to Fox News a lot.
How much does the Iranian mindset, how likely is it that there is any kind of real regime change in Iran because of this conflict anytime soon?
And how much is delusional thinking in parts of Mossad and parts of Israel, the U.S., it's now been published.
They thought they told the president the regime would just collapse after a couple of days.
On that aspect of it, what are your thoughts?
So, first of all, I think at some point, this regime, this theocracy in Iran will fall.
It is not invincible in any way, shape, or form.
But it will not happen this way, in my estimation.
This war has absolutely strengthened their grip on the country.
It has galvanized their support base.
Their support base, in my view, is probably not more than 20% of the population, but that's still 18 million people.
That's not insignificant.
This is not Saddam Hussein's regime or Qaddafi or Bashar al-Assad's regime.
This is a regime that does have a support base.
It's not a majority, in my view, but nevertheless, it has it and it's very, very committed to it.
It has shrunk, and as it has shrunk, it's become more important because if they lose the support base, they don't have anything.
And this is part of the reason why these demands for surrender were completely unrealistic.
And I told this to the administration, that the president is wrong in thinking that the Iranians will fear war more than they will fear surrender.
They will fear surrender far more than they fear war.
They can survive war.
They can even survive losing the war.
They cannot survive surrender because that caused them to lose much of their support base.
And without that, they cannot survive.
Now, this is a revolutionary regime that was born with the paranoia of knowing that everyone would try to undo them because they were not supposed to come into existence in the first place.
So they created a system that was supposed to withstand any counter-revolution, which is part of the reason why, again, this is so much more difficult.
Now, you asked something very important.
You said, to what extent what this delusional thinking in the White House and in Israel?
I think we have to make a distinction here.
I think there was a lot of delusion in the White House.
I don't think there was much in Israel.
I think the Israelis understood fully that this is going to be much, much harder.
But they also understood that Trump is not in principle against war, nor is he in principle against regime change.
He's in principle against anything that is too long, too difficult, and doesn't have a guaranteed likelihood of a glorious success for him.
But if you can convince him that this regime is just about to fall, it's on its last legs, that war will be very easy, and that that will be far more glorious of a victory for you than striking a deal with them.
If you can convince them of their so-called weakness, then you can convince them to go to war and pursue regime change.
So I think the Israelis knew very well that this was going to be much, much harder.
But they knew that they had the best chance in 20 years of getting the United States into this war.
They have tried to convince every president of the United States since the 2000s to go to war with Iran.
They even tried to convince Trump 1 to do so, and Trump 1 rejected them, despite the fact that he agreed to a whole lot of other things that the Israelis asked for.
They finally had that chance, and they weren't going to pass up on it, regardless of the fact that I think they knew quite well that this would lead to a scenario of this kind.
Now, perhaps they thought that at some point there would be a regime implosion because of the killing of a lot of senior folks.
But the idea that this would be over with in four days, as Trump told regional allies, Trump told regional allies this war would take 100 hours, slightly more than four days.
And he only had a plan for that.
He had no plan B.
I don't think the Israelis were in the same place.
They understood very well that that's not the way this was going to play out.
Let me ask you this.
You said this was not like Gaddafi, not like Bassad, not like Saddam.
And I guess the distinction there is the argument is they had no support.
So once that regime was taken out.
No, it's not that they didn't have support, although they had far smaller support bases in the case of Gaddafi and the case of Saddam.
Assad was a little bit different.
But it's because those were regimes that were centered on an individual or a family.
And if you take out the individual and you take out the individual sons, then you're running out of people that would take over that regime.
Whereas this is a very different system.
It has plenty of replacements for almost every position.
And as a result, just this idea that you can just assassinate your way out of this regime's existence is a very, very different proposition.
Now, as the president discovers that he was misled into the war, the question has always been, what's he going to do?
Is he going to find an exit ramp and just pretend we won?
Is he going to concede to Iranian demands and just try to spin it as a win?
Or is he going to do what Professor Pape has been warning about now for decades, that this would be the ultimate escalation trap?
That apparently we're sending various forms of special forces, up to 20,000 or more, into the region, that some are already located there, but some on the way there.
Some arrive on Friday, some arrive over the next couple of weeks.
Where do you think Trump—well, let me put it this way.
What path should Trump take versus what are the risks of the other paths that he could take?
So I think in the next couple of days, we will likely know the trajectory.
He can either push it back another couple of days by not implementing his five-day deadline, which would end by coincidence, of course, when the markets close on Friday, and give himself some more time.
He can go down the path, which I absolutely agree with Bob, Bob Pape, that this would end up becoming an escalation trap by using land forces, ground forces to take an island or try to extract the enriched uranium that the Iranians have on the ground.
Or he can try this idea of just walking out and declaring victory and hoping that the Iranians also end the war.
I don't think that's going to work.
Or finally, he can try a negotiated settlement.
I think we will find out in the next couple of days, potentially, which trajectory we're going on this, because time is not limited.
He has right now probably another two weeks at most in which he can still, with some degree of credibility in the eyes of his own base, declare a victory and say, I won.
This is awesome.
Look at all of the different tactical things I achieved.
All of them together amass to some sort of a strategic victory.
Not convincing in my view, but he can convince his base.
But if this goes beyond those two weeks, and particularly if we go in with land troops, ground troops into Iran, then I think he's crossed the rubric and he's not going to be able to convince his base of that success.
And then things are going to get really dangerous.
And then we're definitely going to be in Bob Pape territory.
We're not quite yet.
Sorry, one question, following that line of potential strategy, and I'll get to another question afterwards.
But he says, okay, you know, declare victory, satisfy the base, almost satisfy the people who didn't necessarily support this from the beginning, say we've achieved what we need to achieve.
What about the Straits of Hormuz?
He can declare victory.
Do the Straits of Hormuz become open?
Because right now they say they're open, except for what the Iranians are doing there.
So they can declare victory all they want.
Would the Iranians allow for commercially feasible traffic through the Straits of Hormuz, even if Trump does that?
That's an excellent question.
I think this is really getting to the core of this issue.
The United States does not control this war any longer.
In fact, I don't think it has since about the fourth day of this war.
Sanctions Relief and Straits00:15:31
Because it is not in a situation in which it can just say, look, I'm done, I'm leaving, and the war by itself just ends.
The Iranians, I do not believe, will open up the Straits of Hormuz, even if the U.S. stops bombing them.
And the reason for this is plentiful.
Let me try to unpack that a little bit.
The Iranians were bombed eight months ago or nine months ago now by Israel and eventually by the United States.
The video that we did was probably early September.
It was based on an article I had written for foreign policy that said that by the end of 2025, that was my prediction, the war would restart.
I was wrong with a couple of weeks, essentially.
They are terrified of a scenario in which there will just be another ceasefire.
And the United States and Israel will use that ceasefire to rearm, regroup, and then relaunch the war in a couple months.
The Iranians cannot tolerate that.
What they're talking about now is that no ceasefire, an end to the war, a durable, enduring end to the war.
As a result, they're not going to let this go just because the U.S. walks away.
They will continue to close the straits.
They have leverage now for the first time in several years.
And they're not going to give it up easily.
And so they're going to make certain demands in order to agree to end the war.
Some of them I think are completely unrealistic.
Some of them I think are doable.
And some of them I think are completely non-negotiable from the Iranian side.
So for instance, I do believe that they will ask for sanctions relief in order to agree to open the straits.
Five weeks ago, two weeks ago, this would have been inconceivable.
But reality is Trump has already offered them and given them sanctions relief because he unsanctioned Iran's oil on the water.
The Iranians had tons of oil in tanker ships on the water.
Trump unsanctioned them so that they could be sold because Trump was in dire need of getting gas prices down in the United States.
So he's very sensitive to rising oil prices.
And of course, the Iranians are actively working to push up oil prices as a way of squeezing the United States.
But right now, they are not only getting formal sanctions relief, the war itself, paradoxically, this I did not predict, has offered Iranians sanctions relief or actually become sanctions relief.
The Iranians are now selling more oil than they were prior to the war.
Prior to the war, they sold less than 1.1 million barrels a day at a price of $65 minus $18 for the kind of sanctions discount they had to give.
Now they're selling about $1.5 million at a price of $110 with only a discount of $2 to $4.
They're selling almost 50% more oil than before at a price almost three times of what they did before.
Would they give that up just to go back to the previous status quo?
I'm not saying they're winning because of this.
I'm just saying that time is far more on their side than that of Trump's because of this massive miscalculation going into this war in the first place.
So to get out of this war, the Iranians are going to demand some form of sanctions relief.
For them, it is a guarantee that the war will not start again.
Because if they don't get sanctions relief, they will be in a state of continuous weakening.
These sanctions are very, very devastating to the Iranian economy.
And if they get weaker, in their view, and I think they're right on this, that will only invite further attacks because it's precisely this perception, erroneous perception, but nevertheless, this perception of Iranian weakness that created this idea of a window of opportunity to attack Iran.
So they need to change their own trajectory after this war as part of the deterrence against getting attacked again.
So Trump just walking away, I don't think it's going to be enough.
The Iranians will likely continue to close the straits and they will likely continue to strike at Israel.
And that will put Trump in a very bad position.
Either he continues to stay out of the war and by that the U.S. and Israel have been separated, which would be a huge win for the Iranians, a major loss for the Israelis.
Or he goes back into the war and then his credibility is completely destroyed every time that he says that he's won the war or every time he says that there's some diplomacy going on.
So he's going to be put in a very bad position.
That's why I think this idea of just declaring victory is not a smart move.
He actually needs to prepare the ground for this by making some sort of a deal with the Iranians.
The kind of stuff we're hearing publicly about these 15 points, I think, are complete non-starters.
But there may be other more serious conversations going on behind the scenes.
I don't know for certain.
I certainly hope so because it would absolutely lie in the U.S. interest to do it.
To what degree does the way we've handled prior negotiations, that the JCPOA, we never ultimately lifted the sanctions and we used the road mapping of their nuclear facilities through the JCPOA to damage those facilities and hit their scientists, that under Trump, there's been now three, four examples where during negotiations, two times we attacked Iran during negotiations.
Also, say we didn't know, but Israel attacked Hamas negotiators in Qatar during negotiations.
We claim to not know, but Ukraine attacked Vladimir Putin during negotiations where they thought they knew his location because of it.
Trump's gaining a reputation globally that it's come in and negotiate and I'll try to murder you while you're negotiating.
And how much has that damaged it?
Apparently, the Iranians are saying they will not negotiate ever again with Witkoff and Kushner.
Witkoff appeared to misrepresent what took place, according to the Oman mediator.
How much does he need to shift?
There's talk of giving it all over to Vance, taking it out of the hands of Witkoff and Kushner.
How much does he need to change that aspect to try to restart negotiations?
First of all, I think your point is really very, very important.
We really need to take it into account that the manner in which we have sabotaged diplomacy before walking out of the JCPOA, but then also twice bombing the Iranians in the middle of negotiations is, I mean, it's devastating to American credibility.
And when your credibility is low, it raises the cost of future agreements because the other side is going to ask for far more robust guarantees because you have a track record of not delivering.
It's just like, you know, if you fail on a lot of your credit cards or on your mortgage, the bank is going to ask way more of a collateral or whatever the, you know, you know the terminology better than I do, what you need to give in order for them to ever agree to give you another loan.
So that is what is happening to our credibility right now.
And it's not a future problem.
It's a now problem.
We started this war four weeks ago in the midst of negotiations.
And now Trump is having a hard time finding a pathway back to the negotiating table in which the Iranians agree to show up.
Because why would they at this point?
Now, in my view, they should ultimately.
But we have to recognize that we have disincentivized them from actually engaging with us diplomatically.
And we may have thought that that was a smart move from us because we're in a position of strength.
But guess what?
We're not in a position of strength right now.
And we do need these talks.
And we've made it more difficult for ourselves to be able to secure our interests with this behavior.
One thing that's driving me crazy is I don't know what to believe.
Trump comes out and the admin comes out and says we're negotiating with Iranian officials.
Then you see tweets and posts and public statements from whatever's left of Iranian officials saying we're not in any talks, sending out threatening videos.
I mean, where do you even get your information from?
And how does one know what to believe?
Everyone says, well, the Iranians lie all the time, or the Iranian regime lies all the time, so don't trust anything they say.
Governments, especially in time of war, control narrative control information through various means and call it whatever you want.
How do we even know what to believe in terms of the mutually opposing fact pattern we're being told from both sides here?
Look, you have to treat government statements, regardless of which government is coming from, with the same type of skepticism that you would treat a comment on YouTube, with a tremendous degree of skepticism, because you don't know who's behind it.
You don't know if it's true or not.
And it's the same thing you have to do on this situation.
I don't think we should take any statements coming from the Iranian government at face value or that of the United States.
It's just a reality.
It's not a judgment against this side or that side.
But as they say, truth is the first victim in war.
And we are in a war right now.
To be able to really understand what's going on, you actually have to talk to the people inside and try to get a sense of what is happening rather than relying on headlines or what is being reported in the press.
I do believe that these kind of things that we're hearing about, that there's some talks going on, and this is the offer that the U.S. made 15 points.
I looked at those 15 points.
They're complete non-starters.
I don't believe that that actually is what the U.S. is doing.
I think some of that is deliberate misinformation.
A lot of it is being leaked in the Israeli media.
What the sources of that is, we don't know for certain.
But we should recognize one thing.
Trump has an interest in calming the energy markets in order to push down gas prices, because rising gas prices and food prices in the U.S. will eventually turn his own base against him on this war.
So he will lose time if gas prices go up, because it will essentially shorten the time before now and when the base starts to turn actively against this war.
The Iranians have the opposite interest.
They have an interest in making sure that they push up gas prices in order to pressure Trump.
So they will not confirm that talks are taking place.
Perhaps it's true, perhaps it's not true.
Trump will state that there's a lot going on diplomatically.
Perhaps true, perhaps not true.
But it's statements that are made to serve their interest.
If real talks are going to take place, I can tell you, though, it would be very foolish to negotiate publicly.
It would be very foolish to put out your parameters and your demands publicly.
That's not the way you do a successful negotiation on a matter as sensitive as this.
Instead, you do it quietly, behind the scenes.
You try to establish the sincerity of the other side, the credibility of your mediators or representatives, and most likely it will not be with Koff and Kushner going forward.
And you do it that way.
And hopefully one day we will wake up and out of the blue, there's a deal.
I would absolutely not do it publicly, given the fact that both sides have so much of their honor and their faith invested in this.
Speaking of which, as sort of a wrap-up question, thanks for your time.
I know we got 30 minutes.
It's a sort of combo.
One is, as a mediator, Alexander McCorris of the Duran recommended that Russia would be a more credible mediator in terms of this than even Pakistan or Turkey, given various issues that are present.
I wanted what your thoughts on that were.
And then as the wrap-up question, what's the worst case, best case, and most likely case scenario?
The risk of nuclear escalation, risk of desalination plants getting hit in the Gulf countries that would lead to a mass refugee crisis, potentially destroy them.
Iran is now publicly saying that if their coast is invaded, they're going to invade the coast of Bahrain and the Emirates, e.g., where Dubai is.
So what do you see as the best, worst, and most likely case scenarios going forward?
So lots of questions.
I'll try to be very quick here.
On your first question, actually, I have a piece coming out tomorrow together with George Beebe, who's the former head of Russia analysis at CIA and is one of my colleagues at the Quincy Institute, arguing actually that Russia should be employed as a mediator.
That's not to say that Russia is better or worse than some of these other candidates, but I do think that we are going to need some sort of negotiation that involves other major powers.
That this is not something that at this point can be resolved any longer just by these states that are very, very good diplomatically, like Oman and Qatar, but don't have much of weight behind themselves in and of themselves.
Whereas Russia or China that are veto-carrying countries or the Europeans in the past that were also used carries a different weight.
And I think it would be much riskier for the United States, for instance, to start bombing again in the middle of a negotiation in which you have some of these major powers involved in.
In terms of best and worst case scenarios, the worst case scenario, in my view, is that we actually try to take some islands, we put ground troops into play.
I think there's going to be a massacre.
I don't think there's going to be a decisive victory.
I think it's going to lead to a scenario that will be exactly the type of escalation trap that Bob Pape has been warning us about for quite some time.
And That could be triggered or could trigger some of these other worst case scenarios that you mentioned, such as that they would go after desalination plants in GCC or even the power grids in Israel.
The reality is that the power grids in Israel are more vulnerable than the Iranian ones.
And as a result, we would just see a global depression as a result of this war.
Best case scenario is that the administration has come to terms with reality.
This war is not going well.
It's much better to end it rather than thinking that over time there will be some sort of a miraculous turnaround.
It won't happen.
It didn't happen in Iraq.
It didn't happen in Afghanistan.
It won't happen here either.
But that they conduct that negotiation behind the scenes quietly, far away from the cameras, and get to a scenario at the end of this that not only ends the war, but actually creates circumstances that can allow for a pathway back, not to just an end state of the war, but to actual peace.
And that includes peace between the United States and Iran.
I don't think the U.S. or Iran can frankly continue to afford this conflict going on because even if it doesn't go to war, it has been costly and counter to the interest of both sides for more than two decades now at this point.
Thank you very much.
Where can people follow your work?
I'm a big fan of this.
Go to my Twitter, which is TParsi, or my Substack, which is Triton Parsi, or to the website of the Quincy Institute, which is quincyinst.org.
Teresa, you'll send me all the links, but I'll put them in the pinned comment when the show is over so that people can find you.
Fantastic.
Treat any questions.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Appreciate it.
Thank you.
Have a good one.
Robert, stick around.
You got time, Robert?
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
The man, what is going wrong with Hunley?
I don't even want to get off Hunley's back.
I don't even know what's going on with Hunley.
This is what I mean.
This is what I mean.
I mean, God bless him.
But he's an example.
So they did their America's Untold Stories news or whatever.
They were all excited yesterday because they believed that there was going to be a ceasefire.
Hunley Leader Lying About Ceasefire00:15:29
They believed Trump's fake, rare, fake promises.
They thought that was real.
They're all excited.
I was like, wow, there's some people that are really in this like in this silo of conservative opinion.
This is like back to the Iraq war.
I didn't think we would resee this in the modern era where people could get totally captured and believe.
I mean, no, folks, there is no ceasefire.
There have been no negotiations.
Trump was just lying.
That's all he was doing.
He was lying his ass off.
The, oh, they were going to give me a present.
He took credit for something that they already announced that, yeah, friendly regimes still get to use the straight.
Shock, shock.
I mean, it just startled me.
They think that a bunch of things are just totally false and they're totally fake.
I mean, I'm just using him as an example.
No, no, I know.
But I mean, it's a bunch of, I mean, have you run into it?
I've run into people that they believe nonsense.
They believe all the Fox.
I guess they just get a lot of Fox News is just preaching garbage night in, night out.
We're back to Iraq war propaganda style.
It is what I do find amazing is it comes back to the same moving target where it's not a war.
It's just precision strikes, but it's a war and it is a serious war now.
And if you're not on board with America at war, then you're a traitor.
But then it always just reverts to the now we've been at war with them for 47 years.
They have to be taken out once and for all.
And Trump's going to do it.
And he's going to do what every other president has not been able to do.
It is, I'm reading the chat in real time.
And it's not to say that, you know, the Iranian regime is not a, you know, supports terrorism as it's generally understood and generally defined.
A number of other Middle Eastern states with which America has very formal ties does the same thing.
And so the question then becomes, why now?
And what is the end goal?
The one thing that people don't understand is what is the end goal?
Bomb the shit out of them as if we have endless reserves of bombs, which I was sort of surprised to see how thin the reserve was.
We had heard warnings about it.
Yeah, exactly.
But you would only know the warnings if you follow independent media sources.
That, you know, if you followed, you know, like what the Duran talked about in terms of Brian Berlechtik, who I disagree with on Ranger politics, but he's a former Marine who's been detailing diminishing supplies.
Elbridge Colby has been warning about this now for years.
He's the Under Secretary of Defense.
We have diminishing.
It's why he said we shouldn't go into the Middle East.
It's why his national security statement that Trump signed off on four months ago said we're not going to do any more Mideast wars.
But it's like the level of people are just buying whatever it is.
Like they really believe that Trump is involved in detailed negotiations with the Iranians, that in fact, there are ceasefire plans already being put in place, that they've already agreed.
I mean, all of that is false.
Trump just made it up.
He just made it up, folks.
He just made it up.
What I've been warning about for two months now is out in public news reports today that when it comes to the military, this is the problem going all the way back.
Trump laid out through Susie Wiles in late 2025 to cabinet members and everyone else, do not share any information with the president that he might react negatively to.
And so they were basically trying to out sycophant one another.
You're talking about cabinet officials doing this.
And what's going to happen when you're in a war?
Then there's already a natural tendency for the propaganda.
You have Hitler, the bunker mindset by Trump.
They give him these two minutes of look at all these great things we blew up today.
And he's like, why is people in the media saying this isn't going fantastically?
I mean, I don't know, like, there's memes out there that he's talking to lampshades and he thinks they're Iranians.
You know, it's that kind of joke.
But there is no, he has not been engaged in any meaningful peace negotiations.
He made it up.
He made it up because he's in trouble.
Well, this is the someone's going to say, Barnes, you've gone full TDS that you don't trust Trump when he says I understand why he's making it up.
He's got to calm the markets and he doesn't have a solution.
So he's like, I'm just going to make some stuff up and hope I can buy some time.
People are going to say you're believing Iranian propaganda over American.
That's from a bunch of U.S. sources.
I mean, obviously, I had some, you know, people who I knew the backstory of what was happening over the last several months.
So granted, I have more access to some of that.
But what's fascinating is like someone like Hundley, the reason why I used Hunley, here's someone who has a dissident news channel, conspiracy alternative news channel.
You would think, okay, you would know by now you can't trust the institutional media on this, that you've got to have a diverse source.
Like, take people like Farcy.
Farsi's a geopolitical realist, has no love at all for the Iranian regime.
His family had to flee it, literally, from persecution.
But he's a realist.
What does that mean?
It means what can you accomplish?
What can you not?
What can you achieve?
What can you not?
And the Mearsheimer school.
And Mearsheimer's been predicting this.
Daniel Davis has been predicting this.
Colonel McGregor has been predicting this.
A whole bunch of people have been predicting.
But what it is is they have somehow sideloaded themselves on social media.
It was stuff like when I put out, by the way, you know, you're not going to see a lot of honest data from the war because everybody's censoring.
And the worst censors at the moment, which is extraordinary to me, given the Iranian regime, is actually not the Iranians.
It's the Israelis and the Gulf states.
The Gulf states just arrested like 59-year-old British tourist because he photographed some of the missile damage.
So, and I put this up and I had a bunch of conservative people in my ex-feed say, you just made that up, Barn.
That isn't true.
There's no censorship going on.
It's on their government sites.
This is the problem: is that people are going to say, I don't trust Yahoo.
I don't trust MSM because they're anti-Trump.
Okay, fine.
So disregard the reporting.
Evidence grows that Trump is using the war in Iran to manipulate markets.
Okay, fine.
Everybody in the world knows that.
They just got to see it in lifetime.
Now, if you track, there are people you can follow out there, folks, that are real independent, that don't have a dog in the fight, aren't pro-Trump, anti-Trump.
I would note McGregor, pro-Trump, Davis, pro-Trump.
Duran was very sympathetic to Trump.
A bunch of these people were sympathetic or pro-Trump.
They were just saying the exact same thing Joe Kent says.
And when they hear Joe Kent, Trump officials say it, they go into all kinds of denial and all kinds of.
I've been stunned at the psychology.
I guess it must be the psychology at heart.
Because I'm trying to figure this out.
I understood this having lived through it many, many times.
You know, Iraq War I, porn, you understand they took out little babies and bashed them in their head in the incubators.
I was like, I think that's a bunch of garbage.
Oh, you must be pro-Hushane.
You know, all that nonsense.
I understood that back then because mainstream media had almost a lot on any access to information.
I understood it to a degree with Iraq War II and Afghanistan.
I mean, like, people send me Victor David Hansen's things.
It's like, do you realize he cheerleaded every single dumb war we've ever been involved in?
He's that, that isn't his strength.
Let's put it that way.
But I thought now, when you've got all kinds of independent information you can access from people who are just giving you realistic intakes and you get to and listen to all sides and see, okay, this is what this side's saying, this is what this side's saying, see what the truth is.
Instead, they have psychologically, it must be psychological because they know how to go and they now have the tools and have the means to access independent people like us interviewing Farsi, the Dr. Farcy, to do so.
And they were choosing not to.
And then they get real arrogant, over the top, cocky about it.
Don't know how stupid they sound.
When you really think Trump is in detailed negotiations and is right about to get a ceasefire, my friends, you're a sucker.
You're a sap.
This is utterly false.
It'll be proven.
Robert, I'm going to steel man it.
There are some negotiations.
They got the mediator who's the one who's relaying some information.
The obvious argument is going to be the Iranians who want to pretend that the talks are not going on can always do so because they've killed the former leaders.
And now they can always argue those people who are in discussions with Trump are not the leaders.
So therefore, he's not having discussions with the leaders.
And Trump.
What do you think Trump can't identify who it is?
What do you think Trump can't tell you what the gift is?
Well, because it's fake.
No, no, because the Leon Iran is their supreme leader.
Is there a new?
I mean, you could dislike, hate the regime, whatever.
That is who their leader is.
Yeah, but then they have who their military leaders are.
The IRGC is really running the show.
We were pretending for a while that the Speaker of the House was their new leader.
And he immediately came out and said, I'm not negotiating anything with you.
Trump is, look, Trump keeps walking.
He doesn't know a way out.
He didn't have a plan B.
It's just recognizing the reality.
And so he's trying to figure out how do I get out and stay still safe face?
How do I do that?
And in the interim, how do I convince the markets to not sink me?
And that's his goal.
And so he's going to do whatever he needs to do that for as long as he can.
But, Robert, the steel man is going to be he's not identifying who he's talking with because someone might kill them.
Some other country might kill them.
That I would say if he's going to lie, he's going to have an answer to the question, what's the gift?
And so he's negotiating with people who may or may not be in charge.
My question to he's not negotiating with anyone.
He's not negotiating with anyone.
I can guarantee you that right now.
He has not been negotiating with anybody.
He hasn't been because they were pretending that he was still pretending until today that Witkoff and Cush was the one in negotiation.
Iran made clear they were never going to talk to Witkoff again.
Period.
End of story.
So he has made this all up.
But so he's talking to someone who will talk to Witkoff and now Iran, the regime's going to say those people aren't representing the regime.
He's not talking to anybody in Iran.
He's not talking to anybody in Iran.
He has no contacts with Iran at all.
The question is that I would have asked Trita is who is in charge right now in Iran?
Because from what I understand, set aside everything with, you know, the IRGC is in control right now, and that's the same IRGC.
No, politically, it's still, you have the president still there.
You have the foreign minister still there.
And you have the supreme leader, the new supreme leader.
So any political decisions will be made by them.
But in terms of day-to-day functioning of the war, it's the IRGC.
and the and the Revolutionary Guard.
And as he articulated, they got a hardcore base that ain't budging and that knows its survival depends on winning this, which means they're not going to agree to these 15 points that are put out.
You know, it's bogus because it's similar to what we did with Russia and Ukraine.
Yeah.
Where we put out these bogus points and say that these are the points.
Like, well, anybody following this knew Russia would never accept any of those points.
So it was, we're negotiating with ourselves.
Hey, we agree that I'll agree that you agree that I agree to that.
Look, I understand where Trump's at.
It's just being realistic about where Trump's at.
Trump's caught himself in a bad situation.
He's in a war.
He can't just declare victory and leave because Iran won't quit.
He can't, he also doesn't know what Bibi will do from day one to the day next.
So he has no control over Bibi Nano.
That's been claimed.
They went and tried to hit near the nuclear plant in Iran again.
So Iran's going to reciprocate right next to Israel's nuclear plant.
And he thinks, well, maybe I'll threaten.
Let's see what happens there.
He tries that.
It backfires.
So then, okay, maybe I'll claim he's going to be doing, he's now been doing this for three weeks.
Hey, there's about to be peace and negotiation during the week.
Keep markets calm.
On the weekend, come up with escalatory threats, hoping that Iran folds and capitulates, living in la-la land.
They don't.
They come back and they say, you hit us, we'll hit you back twice as hard.
So he's like, okay, that didn't work.
Well, let's calm down the markets for another week.
So he's going to have emergency announcements all week.
Emergency announcement, emergency announcement.
Whoa, this big peace development, this big piece of this big ceasefire development, this big victory.
Because he's got no other choice.
Now, in how he thinks of it, he does have a real choice.
His real choice is just cut a real deal with Iran, do it through Russia.
That's the only credible party for negotiating mediation at this point.
Get rid of Witkoff and Kushner.
They're gone.
They're toast.
They have no international credibility at all ever again.
Did I hear somewhere that the reason that was being given why Iran wouldn't negotiate with Witkoff and Kushner is because they were Jewish?
Did I hear that somewhere?
No, it was because they lied.
Well, no, that I imagine would be the.
They didn't say anything about them being Jewish.
They said they're Israeli plants in the sense that they're both very pro-Israel.
So they didn't trust him additionally for that reason.
But if that was a problem, they wouldn't have sat down with him twice before.
It's because they got attacked twice during the middle of settlement negotiations that they're like, these guys.
And then Witkoff compounded it by lying to the press.
I mean, the Oman mediator basically, he said it diplomatically, but he's like, they're lying about what happened in the negotiations.
And so that told the whole world, these guys are a joke.
You can't use them.
Can't trust them.
Can't talk, can't deal with them.
And Pakistan on and off relations with Iran.
Turkey definitely on and off relations with Iran.
They're not going to be people who can successfully mediate.
So if you're serious, you have if Trump, but Trump doesn't want to look weak.
So this is, I'll give Farsi credit.
This was very smart.
He was saying, keep it all super secret so everybody can save face.
And if you're going to, and that means you're not going to be publicly discussing it.
So anything he's publicly discussing would be solely to solve the markets.
But he's like, if you're serious, it's got to be through Russia because he knows if you're negotiating through Russia, you're not going to attack anybody in the middle of negotiations that you need.
And Russia has more credibility with Iran than anyone else does that could be a potential mediator.
And so what is Trump didn't like hearing when he called Putin a week or two ago.
And like, all this stuff is confession through rejection.
When he says Iran is begging for a ceasefire, no, no, Trump is begging for a ceasefire.
When he says, they keep calling me.
No, he keeps trying to call them.
This is just being honest about the situation.
And people, I think, because they want to support Trump or want to believe in Trump, whatever, are just buying into utter garbage.
And I think it's risky for Trump long term.
What happens when the markets figure this out?
Not only the insider trading that's happening, which is embarrassing.
It looks like massive corruption at scale.
You know, people that don't know, somebody made hundreds of millions of dollars with inside information about what Trump was going to announce five minutes before he announced it.
That's a problem.
And it's been, by the way, recurrent and repeat.
It's happened multiple times in both the prediction markets and the equity markets and the oil markets.
How he thinks none of this is going to blow back on him.
I don't understand what their logic is in a lot of them.
Just in case, and it's CBS news, and you can, you can, the problem is we live in a world right now where everybody can write off whatever they want based on any reasons.
Can't trust the Iranians.
They're liars.
Can't trust CBS news.
Can't trust anything from MSM.
So you got to get this article coming from, say, Fox News before you can start to believe it.
There were some interesting trades placed minutes before where people made, I think it was over a billion dollars based on, I forget if it was over 1.5 billion just this time around in the stock market being traded.
Nixon Style Secret Plan00:04:06
And then another 150 million that apparently they're finding even more evidence of, maybe up to half a billion.
Let's get one from the New York Post because then that way it'll be more difficult for people to write off.
580 million.
Anybody who doubts it, Rupert Murdoch owns the New York Post.
Rupert Murdoch, as has now been publicly reported, heavily lobbied for this war in Iran.
580 million in oil trades made minutes before Trump's key Iran announcement draw scrutiny.
The chief investigator.
Did you see the chief investigator for the SEC, who has an impeccable reputation, resigned?
And the story is that she's been cut off from investigating anything connected to a Trump donor or a Trump supporter or Trump administration person about insider trading.
How do they think they're going to get away with all this?
I mean, the brazenness is unbelievable.
But putting that part aside, folks, pretending that this is 4D chess is only getting Trump into more trouble rather than less.
The quicker and sooner, you know, we recognize reality, the easier and better chance we can get out of this with minimal political and personal and geopolitical casualties.
What I love is, first of all, I want to show this because there's a bunch of people in the chat who think it makes you a good, a good Trump supporter to sit there and spew bullshit, to follow, to get hope line and syncretism.
how many times how many times have we heard the we've been at war with ron for 47 years before that talking point came out I know.
And now everybody.
It's fair to say the U.S. and the CIA and the deep state and the MI6 has been at war with Iran for 47 years.
I want to bring this one up because I would have to go back and verify personally the amount of shit I might have taken from Laura being accused of being a Trump critic or betraying Trump by what I think is speaking more constructive criticism.
This is what she just posted today.
We went from Zuckerberg for prison to Zuckerberg being now being appointed to President Trump's White House tech panel.
So much for accountability.
Zuckerberg deplatformed President Trump, censored his supporters, and then helped steal an election.
What a slap in the face to MAGA.
I'm not picking on Laura.
I was just told that MAGA is whatever Trump says it is.
So now it must be Zuckerberg is MAGA as well.
This is what's happening in the polling data.
So, the I mean, I am concerned that the president is not getting independent information, that they don't want to share negative intel with him, negative information with him.
I mean, what was described to me in January was like one step away from King Lear style madness of Richard Nixon at the end of his terms.
For those people that don't know, he started drinking and he'd walk around talking to the portraits in the White House as if they were real.
Well, but to tell it, explain to everybody the history, like when Nixon could not understand why he was unpopular with his own base.
Like, I didn't live through it.
I don't think you didn't live through it either because you're not that much older.
No, I just studied it extensively.
But I was born the year he resigned, but that's about all.
You don't remember what happened when you were zero years old.
But no, so Nixon just couldn't understand his unpopularity or how he became unpopular with the people with whom he was very popular.
Look, this is another example of the Trump ceasefire.
The example I was going to give during the interview was, do you ever remember, if you studied it or watched it, Nixon's secret plan to end the war in Vietnam, a 1972 presidential campaign?
There was no secret plan.
He did the same deal that was on the table in 1968 and 1973.
But Nixon knew, I got to get elected.
I got to get people convinced that the war is going to get over.
So I'm going to tell them I got a secret plan.
By the way, he got caught in the escalation trap in Vietnam the same way LBJ did, the same way Trump is now being tempted with.
I highly recommend Professor Robert Pape.
That's who he's referencing as Bob.
Obviously, they know each other well.
Bob Pape, who advised the Trump administration, by the way, well-regarded, well-respected American intellectual who's been focused on how do governments get caught in an escalation trap where they escalate against their own interest and against what is achievable.
Terrorist Regime Control Debate00:02:50
And he explained the psychology of it.
And for 20 years, he has said the U.S.'s greatest risk of an escalation trap is Iran for a whole bunch of reasons.
And now we're seeing it play out in lifetime.
And he's been, but how it happens is like Nixon.
Nixon couldn't understand why the Vietnamese wouldn't just give up.
So what did he do?
Mass bombing raids, risky special forces operations.
All the things that are on the plate right now for Trump.
It never worked.
This isn't going to work.
The best way we could achieve an outcome, let Iran control the Straits of Hormuz.
That's just a practicality.
Figure out a, you know, pull out, get out, tell BB, stay home, quit invading every other country in the world, try to take care of Israelis for a little while.
Number two, maybe even do it in a high-profile way that creates some political distance and allows some more political credibility for the president.
End all the sanctions on Iran and refocus your agenda here to the United States.
But he's got to be willing to take that.
As long as he's deluding himself or people are whispering in his ear, you're still winning.
You're still winning.
You're still winning.
We're one step away.
That gets us closer and closer to why we're sending thousands.
We're sending not only airborne units and not only Marines.
We're sending infantry units now that are on the way to Iran.
Robert, I want to steel man a bunch of this because people are going to say you cannot possibly give control of the straits of Hormuz over to Iran.
They're a terrorist enemy of America.
Always give it to them.
They already got it.
And so now people don't understand there's two forms of control.
One is through active control and the other one is through ability to destroy.
And the ability to interfere with transport through the straits of Hormuz, as Iran is doing right now, is effective control.
It's not administrative control.
It's destructive control.
Write that down, people.
It's a good one.
The flip side to this is, and everybody's saying, like, Iran is a terrorist regime.
They must be obliterated.
Then why the hell would Trump have ever been negotiating with them in the first place if that were true?
And then if the answer to that is going to be the negotiations were always duplicitous with the intent of destroying them, who the hell is ever going to know that they're able to negotiate with America going forward?
So at the end of the day, Iran supports terrorism, period, full stop.
The question is going to be, why does America still do business with Saudi Arabia, with other countries that supported terrorism, including 9-11?
You can answer that question on your own and make whatever distinctions you want to say.
Well, they're an ally now and Iran never will be, but Saudi Arabia never should have been, but they are now.
At some point, you're never going to control Iran.
So the only end goal is, and I've asked this of people, what is the end goal?
Just bomb the ever-loving hell out of Iran, hope that they don't ally with North Korea and bypass their ability to develop a nuke and just get one from someone who's already got one.
Leaking Truth to Stop War00:03:53
Or another Iraq 2.0 and in eight to 10 years, you're going to say we declared mission accomplished as effectively was done after four weeks.
I mean, there's a reason why JD Vance is leaking to people that he's not even going to run in 2028.
And he's going to use his fourth kid as his excuse.
So he understands the disaster, the opinion on the story.
I had heard that.
I don't want to ask sources.
I hadn't heard that it was a leak.
I just heard it was a rumor.
But I guess that's where a rumor is.
It is a leak.
I mean, he understands what a shit show it is.
He understands it fully and completely.
The goal, the hope was Kent going out there would get Trump's attention in a way to get him to reverse course.
And instead, Trump's doubling down on personal insults instead, which was very, I'm not going to sit there and justify a man who has cheated on every girlfriend and wife he's ever had, taking a pot shots at a guy who lost his wife from a conflict that she should have already been withdrawn from had the military followed Trump's orders in his first term, marrying someone four years later.
No, no, no.
I mean, that's just people that excuse that, I'm sorry.
You keep crossing, they're becoming pure cultists.
These Trump devotion syndrome people are, it's whatever Trump says must be the truth.
Anyone who doubts it is a heretic.
I mean, they should listen to themselves.
They sound like the left's caricature of the Trump movement over the past 10 years.
And when you're attacking Joe Kent, a man with 11 combat tours and six bronze stars, you're the problem, not Joe Kent.
No, no, not just that.
Again, see, if I were destructively critical of Trump, I would have jumped on that statement as well.
When he said the thing about Massey and his marriage, totally classless as well.
No, but it was classless.
It's like, okay, I'm not going to, like, that's destructive criticism.
And then other people say, well, that's just Trump.
That's my Trump.
I love that Trump is suggesting that someone who got married four and a half years after his wife was killed in battle somehow didn't wait enough time.
So I, you know, I'm going to ignore it.
I'm not going to, it's not value added, nor is it constructive to even focus on that level of stupidity.
But the sicko fancy from people out there who are saying it's justified because they disagree with what they think Kent did, and they don't have a flipping shred of evidence to support the things they're saying about Kent.
I'm not supporting Joe for any other reason.
If it turns out he leaked classified information or even surreptitiously leaked private information, depending on what it is, we'll talk about it.
I mean, I don't know what would be private.
That's not a crime.
Well, no, if he likes it.
If you're complaining about leakers, folks out there, everybody in Washington knows the number one leaker in Washington is Donald John Trump.
Nobody leaks more than Trump.
Well, no, no, no, no.
Because it's not a leak when Trump, and I'm not trying to be.
It's not an illegal leak.
No, it's not.
But I'm saying if people that have this, oh, I have a moral opposition to leakers.
Like, well, you have a moral opposition to Trump.
No, because Trump decides what he makes public.
It's other people who leak.
In terms of legality.
But the fact that he leaks like a civ is, he's always trying to manipulate different things.
But I mean, I think it's risky.
What happens when people start to figure that, or just even whether it's right or wrong, when you cry wolf over and over again, what happens if now you can't move the markets anymore?
You can't stabilize the markets anymore because nobody believes you anymore.
We think it gets resolved before it comes to that point.
Yes, yes, he is.
But he's running high-risk gambles.
And I feared there's no one around him telling him.
I know Vance does what he can, but there's nobody else telling him, whoa, hold on, get out while you still can.
People should go back and listen to the tapes of Lyndon Baines Johnson talking to Richard Russell during the whole buildup to Vietnam, where Johnson keeps admitting this is a mistake.
This is a screw-up.
This isn't going well.
And yet he kept doubling down, doubling down, doubling down.
If you don't want us to double down into a dumb war that could ruin the Trump presidency, put Democrats in complete control of all three branches of government, and have a geopolitical and economic disaster, then you want him to get honest information, not seal clapping.
Independent Voter Mindset Shift00:03:26
Woohoo!
Woohoo!
That's amazing.
Oh, yeah, we just got a peace deal, everybody, with a fake Imam and I told over Rand.
I mean, you know, you're not helping him.
You're hurting him.
You're not helping the country.
You're hurting the country.
You're not helping the party.
You're hurting the party.
It's already gotten to the point where now, because they're a bunch of sycophants who don't even see that they're just always moving the goalpost, now it's come to the point where they concede they're likely going to lose the midterms, but that always happens.
And it would have been so much worse except for there was the seat, people are reporting on the seat in Florida, Trump's own area that flipped.
Trump is more logo is now represented by Democrats in the Florida State House and the Florida State Senate and the House and maybe even the House too.
That was, here's what was terrifying about that.
In that case, Republicans outvoted Democrats in that seat by nine points.
So for them to lose means they had to lose independents, who in that area lean Republican by like 30 points or more.
And they did.
They lost independents by 40 points in a conservative Florida district.
That is a huge sign.
I mean, in fairness to Trump, it's Palm Beach county.
Well, I mean, it's not really Trump specific in that sense.
It's more, this is where the mindset is of independent voters.
That when you double down, I mean, Trump really believes he has 100.
He went off on a Newsmax reporter the other day.
Folks, he's losing it.
And people need to get around him to restrain him.
Or this is going to be LBJ on steroids.
That's what's good.
That's what's good.
Professor Pape, who, by the way, is a Trump supporter, said Trump is on the verge of becoming LBJ number two if he doesn't reverse course fast.
And that means swallowing some pride and moving on.
Yeah, well, King of Bill Tong says, try our selection of Piri Piri.
I just had it yesterday, Bill Tong.
It's delicious and perfectly spicy.
Great Bill-Tong flavor with an added mild heat, over 50% protein packed with B vitamins, creatine, iron, zinc, and more.
Go to Billtongusa.com.
Code Viva for 10% off.
Yeah, you'll feel better already.
It was like, man, it's a nuclear war tomorrow, but you won't worry about it when you have tasty, tasty Bill Tong from King of Bill Tong.
Your appetite will be satiated.
Ginger Ninja 1776 says, I keep hearing the meme, I don't know if they're serious.
If they're serious, they are.
You can ask King of Biltong.
I wonder if his product be like a good survivor package kind of thing.
You know what I mean?
It doesn't last forever when it's enough.
Nah, because it doesn't last.
It's human and it doesn't last forever once opened.
And it doesn't last forever even when it's not open because it's not like that dried up beef jerky.
It's human.
And you got to keep it refrigerated.
So it's good for camping.
It lasts a good few days.
Oh, it's great for.
It's amazing.
Biden was LBJ, but retarded.
Trump is becoming LBJ on steroids.
Yes, that's Ginger Ninja.
That's the risk.
That's exactly the risk.
Robert, we're going to do an after-party with locals.
Yeah, we're talking about Viva Barnes Law.locals.com and Rumble Premium.
The big explosive information that Steve Baker disclosed yesterday with Viva on two fronts.
One on the front on the person that cashed Patel.
You know, I'm starting to wonder if the girlfriend, you know, if we apply a test.
You see that?
She puts it.
Okay, we're saying she's an Israeli plant.
Just say, maybe, just with a question mark.
No, don't send your lawsuits explained.
It's not defamation if you put a question mark.
Don't send your lawsuits courtesy of Viva.
FBI Investigation and Raids00:02:35
Send them straight to Barnes.
Hold on.
We're going to go there, guys.
Everybody.
VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com.
Rumble Premium.
Oh, got a raid.
We got a raid redacted.
They are up there.
So give us one second.
We're going to go raid redacted.
And we are going to have if you haven't already had enough Iran stuff.
Go listen to Redactive.
We're going to have a good after-party, and it'll be for everyone who's on Rumble Premium and everyone in Locals.
So raid, bada bing, bada boom.
And we're not going to use up all the material for Sunday's show.
Go raid.
Robert, she puts out a 13-tweet post accusing, let me go find this, accusing, I don't know, the Flynn.
Ivan raided.
Flynn is leading it.
He's leading.
Did y'all know what you saw, General Flynn?
You put out a response with a little video.
It's a cat meme of two cats playing, you know, doing the plugging away and then laughing.
He goes, here's the secret Flynn conspiracy to manipulate the media.
Can you imagine throwing Flynn in and then just like, hey, let's start just attacking Catholics.
So start attacking evangelicals.
Let's just start attacking all Catholics.
It's because that's such a brilliant political move.
I'm not the one to say, stay in your lane.
You're a country singer.
How dare you venture into politics?
No, she goes on Prague Your U.
She shares her political insights.
But on the one hand, the admins Patel is trying to paint her as a country singer, innocent, babe in the woods.
You can't possibly criticize her.
And then she goes on a 13, whatever they call these things, thread.
Threads.
A 13 thread diatribe about how a foreign-linked influence network has been running coordinated operations against the Trump administration for 22 months.
I know it's real because they ran one against me.
I was targeted.
She goes on.
You know what this is?
Confession through protection.
Man, it's a useful filter.
I mean, it's useful these days with Trump, but it is incredible how much people confess.
Because, yeah, there's been a big foreign operation.
It comes from a little government called Israel.
That's who the foreign government trying to influence us is.
Laura Luma puts out a tweet after it says, FBI director Kash Patel's girlfriend.
I love it.
She's her own independent woman, yet we're always going to refer to her as Kash Patel's girlfriend and then complain when people draw some connections.
FBI Director Kash Patel's girlfriend just said it.
General Flynn, Tucker Catarlson, Joe Kent, and Candace Owens are tied up in a foreign influence operation.
And I said, jokingly, are you accusing the FBI director of leaking classified information to his girlfriend?
I mean, some people say it's not classified.
You're right.
I probably should have said confidential or privileged because if it's an investigation, it's not classified, but it's not public.
And that's why the FBI says we can't confirm the existence or deny the existence of any investigation.
That was written by someone in intelligence, that 13th thread.