Latest / Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar / 6/24/26: Iran Denies Trump Nuclear Claims, Tulsi Resigns, UAE Sudan Horrors

Transcript

6/24/26: Iran Denies Trump Nuclear Claims, Tulsi Resigns, UAE Sudan Horrors · Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar

0:00
Speaker 1: Hey, guys, Saga and Crystal here.
0:01
Speaker 2: Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
0:05
Speaker 2: and we are so excited about what that means for
0:07
Speaker 2: the future of this show.
0:08
Speaker 1: This is the only place where you can find honest
0:10
Speaker 1: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
0:13
Speaker 1: not exist anywhere else.
0:14
Speaker 2: So if that is something that's important to you, please
0:17
Speaker 2: go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
0:19
Speaker 2: you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
0:22
Speaker 2: and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
0:25
Speaker 1: We need your help to build the future of independent
0:27
Speaker 1: news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
0:29
Speaker 1: dot com.
0:31
Speaker 2: At the same time, we want to keep our eye
0:32
Speaker 2: on what is unfolding with regard to negotiations between Aaran
0:36
Speaker 2: and the US for a potential end to that war.
0:39
Speaker 2: In joining us now to break down his view of
0:40
Speaker 2: all of those things, and also whether Congress could thwart
0:43
Speaker 2: any potential peace deal is our great front of the show.
0:46
Speaker 2: Doctor Treeta Parsi of the Quincy Institute grad to see.
0:49
Speaker 3: You, sir, Thank you for having me again.
0:51
Speaker 2: Yeah, of course, so we haven't spoken since the weekend negotiations,
0:55
Speaker 2: so I'm just curious your view of how things went
0:58
Speaker 2: and what you see as being the biggest stumbling blocks here.
1:01
Speaker 4: Look, I have to tell you I think this was
1:03
Speaker 4: quite successful. I know there's a lot of noise, and
1:08
Speaker 4: a lot of that noise is aimed at grabbing headlines,
1:11
Speaker 4: and they do. If Devannyas say that they're going to
1:13
Speaker 4: close the straight or if Trump issues a tweet and
1:16
Speaker 4: says that he's going to bomb again, if there isn't
1:19
Speaker 4: a breakthrough, that will take all the oxygen out of
1:21
Speaker 4: the room. But that pushes you away from seeing the
1:24
Speaker 4: actual achievements. And some of the key things, of course,
1:28
Speaker 4: are that they set up deconflicting mechanisms, both in Lebanon
1:32
Speaker 4: and for the Strait of Hormoes. In Lebanon, Vanians are included,
1:36
Speaker 4: which was never the case before. Before you had a
1:39
Speaker 4: mechanism in which essentially, if there was a dispute between
1:42
Speaker 4: Israel and Hezbolah, only the United States will determine who
1:45
Speaker 4: was right. And you can imagine how that went, So
1:48
Speaker 4: it wasn't much of a mechanism at all. Now you
1:50
Speaker 4: have Vanyas and the American side both involved in it,
1:53
Speaker 4: so that's going to be a completely different balance, the
1:58
Speaker 4: IAEA is going to be involve althothough there's a kerfuffle
2:01
Speaker 4: about that, but thenvertheless, that is part of article or
2:04
Speaker 4: point eight in the memorandum. They negotiated for nineteen hours,
2:09
Speaker 4: and perhaps most importantly, we've seen a significant pushback by
2:12
Speaker 4: the United States against his role in Lebanon and beyond.
2:15
Speaker 4: Channel thirteen reported yesterday that the Administration has told them
2:21
Speaker 4: that their restriction, that their freedom of maneuver and they're
2:24
Speaker 4: unrestricted maneuverability that they've enjoyed for quite some time now
2:29
Speaker 4: is now changing and they're going to be restricted, not
2:32
Speaker 4: just in Lebanon, but on several different fronts. That was
2:34
Speaker 4: the message from the administration to the Israelis. And then publicly,
2:38
Speaker 4: of course, we have seen how Jdvans essentially has been
2:42
Speaker 4: trying to despecialize the US Israeli relationship by saying they're
2:46
Speaker 4: a great partner and friend, just like Francis. That is
2:50
Speaker 4: a huge emotion of the relationship between the US and Israel.
2:54
Speaker 4: Of course they hadn't happened, but I think he's signaling
2:57
Speaker 4: the direction of travel if the Israelis continue to try
2:59
Speaker 4: to sabotage things which they have and they most likely
3:02
Speaker 4: will continue to do. But that is I think the
3:06
Speaker 4: real outcome of this. It's not the noise, it's not
3:08
Speaker 4: the tweets, etc. And I think we should be ready
3:12
Speaker 4: for the fact that this is going to be an
3:13
Speaker 4: extremely bumpy ride.
3:15
Speaker 3: It's probably going to be more than sixty days.
3:17
Speaker 4: I'm almost certainly when there is a deadline in USC
3:20
Speaker 4: BARN relations, it's almost meant to make sure that it's
3:23
Speaker 4: never met. There was not a single deadline that was
3:25
Speaker 4: meant in the JCPR. I suspect this will be the same.
3:28
Speaker 4: I just hope that it doesn't go as exaggeratedly long
3:31
Speaker 4: as the GCIPUOI did. But it's going to be extremely bumpy,
3:35
Speaker 4: and we're going to constantly be thrown distractions, and it's
3:39
Speaker 4: going to take our eye away from the actual things happening.
3:41
Speaker 4: Let me just add one other thing that I think
3:43
Speaker 4: is really fascinating. They set up these working groups, several
3:47
Speaker 4: different working groups to better organize how the memorandum is
3:50
Speaker 4: going to translate into a final deal. There are regional
3:54
Speaker 4: countries from Turkey, Egypt, Qatar, Saudi oman Uae I believe
4:01
Speaker 4: as well involved in each and every one of these
4:04
Speaker 4: different working groups. They may not all be involved in
4:07
Speaker 4: all of them, but they're all involved in some of them.
4:09
Speaker 4: So you have a regional anchoring of this an involvement.
4:13
Speaker 4: It's not a deal that is being sold to them.
4:15
Speaker 4: It's a deal that is being mediated and negotiated by
4:18
Speaker 4: regional states. That makes it fundamentally different from the JCPA
4:22
Speaker 4: in a way that can make it much more durable.
4:24
Speaker 4: But that in and of itself is also a massive success.
4:28
Speaker 4: So far, nothing is finished, yet, nothing is done. But
4:31
Speaker 4: I would just caution the viewers to not be taken
4:34
Speaker 4: away by all of the headlines about the latest tweet
4:37
Speaker 4: or now the Vinians are backing off of what they're
4:39
Speaker 4: saying in the ia All of that is just part
4:41
Speaker 4: of the negotiations.
4:43
Speaker 2: Let's talk a little bit more about some of the
4:45
Speaker 2: issues that you raise here. In particular, put be one
4:48
Speaker 2: up on the screen. This IAEA issue Trump is, you know,
4:52
Speaker 2: he's wanting to sell his victory narrative, which he needs
4:55
Speaker 2: to do if he's going to be able to, you know,
4:57
Speaker 2: proceed with this deal. And so obviously the whole idea
5:03
Speaker 2: of the memo of understanding was Okay, we're going to
5:06
Speaker 2: have a framework for how we're going to go about
5:09
Speaker 2: deciding some of these more difficult issues, in particular around
5:12
Speaker 2: the straight of for MOOS and the nuclear file. So
5:15
Speaker 2: you've got them offering sort of conflicting account of where
5:18
Speaker 2: they are in terms of the nuclear discussions. What do
5:21
Speaker 2: you make of this and how hardline do you think
5:23
Speaker 2: that the Iranians will be on the nuclear issue given that, Yeah,
5:27
Speaker 2: the whole idea of nuclear weapons is to establish deterrence
5:30
Speaker 2: and establish some sort of leverage that you could use
5:33
Speaker 2: in exactly this type of negotiations. Well, now they have
5:36
Speaker 2: a very powerful, perhaps even more powerful tool of deterrence
5:39
Speaker 2: with their demonstrated capacity to close the straight of for MOOSE.
5:43
Speaker 4: So look on the nuclear issue, I think you're likely
5:46
Speaker 4: going to see in some aspects more concessions from the
5:50
Speaker 4: audience compared to the JCPA. Certainly that was the case
5:53
Speaker 4: on the deal on the table back in February that
5:56
Speaker 4: Trump foolishly rejected.
6:00
Speaker 3: And I think they're.
6:00
Speaker 4: Doing that because the memorandum spells out all sanctions are
6:05
Speaker 4: on the table. Doesn't mean that Trump will lift all sanctions,
6:07
Speaker 4: but he's signaling that all sanctions are under discussion and
6:11
Speaker 4: can be lifted depending on what the Iranians offer in return.
6:15
Speaker 4: I think the biggest mistake the Iranians can commit right
6:18
Speaker 4: now is that they will end up thinking too small,
6:22
Speaker 4: or that they will go for too small of a
6:24
Speaker 4: deal out of fear of the ultra hardliners in Yvon,
6:27
Speaker 4: fearing that they otherwise will throw a fit and creates
6:30
Speaker 4: too big of a problem internally in Ivan. But I
6:33
Speaker 4: think this is an opportunity to actually go really big
6:37
Speaker 4: and make sure that their relationship is fundamentally transformed and
6:42
Speaker 4: with that transforming the entire region. This is clearly what
6:45
Speaker 4: the administration is looking for, and I think it's important
6:48
Speaker 4: to understand Trump's motivation throughout all of these different things
6:52
Speaker 4: has been to achieve big, historic things that are worthy
6:57
Speaker 4: of legacy. He thought that he could do that by
7:02
Speaker 4: overthrowing the government of Iran, doing regime change there, defeating
7:06
Speaker 4: them militarily. None of that works, So now he is
7:09
Speaker 4: trying to see if he can achieve the same historical outcome,
7:13
Speaker 4: the same legacy worthy outcome, if he strikes a transformative
7:18
Speaker 4: deal with the Iranians. And I think there's elements on
7:21
Speaker 4: the Iranian side that are very much open to this,
7:23
Speaker 4: but they're more split on that issue. Than on the
7:26
Speaker 4: broader issue, just making a deal that I think they
7:28
Speaker 4: can get through, but a larger deal could be trickier.
7:32
Speaker 4: But I think it would be a big mistake by
7:34
Speaker 4: the Iranians if they don't aim for that at a minimum,
7:36
Speaker 4: not only because it would be better, but it would
7:38
Speaker 4: also be much more durable if it is a deeper
7:41
Speaker 4: deal with more sanctions relief American companies returning to Iran.
7:46
Speaker 4: You can very easily in that scenario, frankly, see a
7:49
Speaker 4: complete reversal of the regional situation, in which you have
7:53
Speaker 4: Iran's decontainment after decades of being isolated and Israel's recontainment
8:00
Speaker 4: after decades since nineteen ninety one, when Israel came out
8:04
Speaker 4: of its isolation because of the Oslo Accords, but now
8:06
Speaker 4: because having committed a genocide and done everything to prevent peace,
8:10
Speaker 4: he may actually end up going back into isolation, not
8:14
Speaker 4: necessarily as badly as it was before nineteen ninety one,
8:17
Speaker 4: but clearly very different from what it has been in
8:19
Speaker 4: the last two or three decades, or because of its
8:21
Speaker 4: own conduct. These are fundamental changes that can happen in
8:25
Speaker 4: the region, but it all depends on whether they succeed
8:28
Speaker 4: with this steal and the size and depth of this steal.
8:32
Speaker 2: So let's take a look at how Trump is selling
8:35
Speaker 2: this to his base. He spoken and touched on it
8:37
Speaker 2: a little bit at a rally yesterday.
8:39
Speaker 5: Let's take a listen, and.
8:40
Speaker 6: Other people other countries too. We're not the only one
8:43
Speaker 6: that never did anything. They were the bully of the
8:45
Speaker 6: Middle East. And now we're leaving around with no navy,
8:50
Speaker 6: no air force, no anti aircraft, no missile capability, no
8:56
Speaker 6: nuclear program. We're leaving them without any nuclear capacity, and
9:01
Speaker 6: they've agreed to that, and we're getting along quite well.
9:05
Speaker 6: Obama gave them one point seven billion in green cash,
9:09
Speaker 6: remember only seven forty seven They flew over piles of
9:12
Speaker 6: cash one point seven billion dollars, gave them hundreds of
9:15
Speaker 6: billions of dollars and thought they could bribe them into peace. No,
9:19
Speaker 6: the only thing they understand is what these guys in
9:22
Speaker 6: the front row understand is the hammer.
9:25
Speaker 2: So Trump is not bound by truth or reality. He
9:29
Speaker 2: also has a very unique hold on his base, saying
9:32
Speaker 2: these things very diplomatically, but in a way, the fact
9:36
Speaker 2: that he does have this very personalized approach to the
9:39
Speaker 2: presidency and this cult like following with his base could
9:42
Speaker 2: be very helpful in selling the deal that you know,
9:45
Speaker 2: any objective analysis, you look at the deal and you're like, oh,
9:48
Speaker 2: we lost this war. But that's not going to sell
9:51
Speaker 2: very well with you know, with the American people. And
9:53
Speaker 2: because he's unbounded by truth and reality and has this
9:56
Speaker 2: you know, particular relationship, it seems like he may actually
9:59
Speaker 2: be able to pull off convincing at least his people
10:03
Speaker 2: that he is getting something out of this and we
10:05
Speaker 2: emerge the victors and the tough guys, etc.
10:08
Speaker 4: Yeah, you're absolutely right. This is the line he's going
10:11
Speaker 4: to be driving for now. I think once there is
10:14
Speaker 4: a deal, I think you're going to see him add
10:16
Speaker 4: to it other talking points, such as saying that he's
10:19
Speaker 4: the peacemaker. He ended forty seven years of enmity. No
10:23
Speaker 4: other president has managed to do.
10:24
Speaker 3: So.
10:24
Speaker 4: He already hinted at a little bit when he said that,
10:28
Speaker 4: you know, we're getting along very fine apparently, so he's
10:33
Speaker 4: laying the groundwork for that. But also, if there is
10:35
Speaker 4: a deal and there is a lifting of sanctions, primary sanctions,
10:38
Speaker 4: he's going to say that we're now also going to
10:40
Speaker 4: trade with this country, and we're going to bring benefits
10:43
Speaker 4: to the manufacturing industry in the United States, because this
10:46
Speaker 4: is actually a huge market of ninety plus million people,
10:49
Speaker 4: the largest marketers opened up since the follow the Soviet Union.
10:52
Speaker 4: So there's other talking points that I'm sure he will
10:54
Speaker 4: use later on, but for now, this is the line
10:56
Speaker 4: that he's likely going to be sticking with. And what
10:59
Speaker 4: I find interesting is that the Iranian side has We're
11:03
Speaker 4: earlier on saying things of this kind as well, at
11:08
Speaker 4: least in English Twitter, they have kind of tempered it
11:11
Speaker 4: down and are trying to avoid the gloating that they
11:15
Speaker 4: did earlier on. You may remember that when the talk
11:18
Speaker 4: of the mu first was starting to get serious, and
11:22
Speaker 4: then there was some hint that there would be a deal,
11:24
Speaker 4: the Foreign Ministry spokesperson tweeted a picture of the Persian
11:32
Speaker 4: Emperor Sharpul the first defeating the Roman Emperor Valerian, and
11:37
Speaker 4: after that the Romans had to sue for peace on
11:40
Speaker 4: Persia's terms and kind of compare the MoU to that.
11:45
Speaker 4: He took that down later on, and since then they
11:48
Speaker 4: have stopped speaking in that manner, which I think is
11:50
Speaker 4: pretty wise because it's not going to help them or
11:53
Speaker 4: the Trump administration if there is that type of a
11:56
Speaker 4: narrative being pushed, because that narrative right now is primarily
11:59
Speaker 4: pushed by these readis who want to solve bitargest.
12:04
Speaker 2: We talked to Jeremy Scahill, who had some reporting on
12:07
Speaker 2: the internal dynamics in Iran and very noteworthy when you
12:13
Speaker 2: know they put out the Supreme Leader put out his
12:15
Speaker 2: analysises and I'm not really too sure myself, but I
12:19
Speaker 2: trust Gollyboff, I trust Arachi. We're going to pursue this piece,
12:23
Speaker 2: so sort of passing the buck to them, Hey, if
12:25
Speaker 2: this doesn't go well, this was their idea. How significant
12:29
Speaker 2: is the faction in Iran that is not really in
12:32
Speaker 2: favor of these negotiations and things that this is giving
12:34
Speaker 2: up leverage thinks that the US hasn't frankly suffered enough
12:38
Speaker 2: pain to serve as an effective deterrent from future military action.
12:43
Speaker 4: It is significant, but it is not necessarily one that
12:46
Speaker 4: can stop this. It's not that the other factions are
12:51
Speaker 4: afraid of them. It is about how do you manage
12:54
Speaker 4: them throughout this process to make sure that they don't
12:57
Speaker 4: create problems In the National Security Council, the vote was
13:03
Speaker 4: twelve in favor, one against. Of the thirteen votes only one,
13:08
Speaker 4: and that was say Agen who voted against this, who
13:12
Speaker 4: is one of these ultra hardliners. So they have a
13:14
Speaker 4: position within the system. They are intimidating, they are strong
13:19
Speaker 4: in some ways, but they are also in a small
13:22
Speaker 4: minority at this point and increasingly isolated. That the new
13:26
Speaker 4: Supreme Leader issued this statement in which he essentially distanced
13:30
Speaker 4: himself a bit from it and signaled that he was
13:34
Speaker 4: not necessarily in favor, but he was convinced by the
13:36
Speaker 4: others and he trusts them. Is exactly what the previous
13:40
Speaker 4: Supreme Leader did. The difference, of course, is this Supreme
13:44
Speaker 4: Leader has been in his position for about two or
13:46
Speaker 4: three months. He's not had a chance to actually establish himself,
13:50
Speaker 4: and he has, in this short term two and three months,
13:53
Speaker 4: been faced with the biggest and most consequential, consequential decision
13:58
Speaker 4: of the Islamic Republic forty seven years in power since
14:02
Speaker 4: he get found, since he got founded. So it's a
14:05
Speaker 4: very very tough decision for him. So and he has
14:08
Speaker 4: chosen to pursue the path of his father, which is
14:10
Speaker 4: to approve it but saying that he disagrees with it
14:13
Speaker 4: or that he's skeptical about it, in order to provide
14:15
Speaker 4: himself with some protection. At the same time that he
14:19
Speaker 4: did this, the Iranians wanted Trump to sign the MU
14:23
Speaker 4: and that's why Possession was the co signer, which is
14:26
Speaker 4: an unprecedented think This is not what happened with the JCPA,
14:30
Speaker 4: because they wanted Trump to really commit himself to the deal,
14:34
Speaker 4: while the Supreme Leader himself kept a certain distance from it.
14:39
Speaker 2: And on our side, we got Trump saying if it
14:41
Speaker 2: doesn't go well, I'll just blame j So they're playing
14:45
Speaker 2: our own game here as well. You know, we talked
14:47
Speaker 2: at nauseum on the show about the obstacle that Israel
14:51
Speaker 2: poses and their continued commitment to you know, their invasion
14:54
Speaker 2: and attacks inside of Lebmanon. So I think everybody pretty
14:57
Speaker 2: well understands that dynamic, but I really want to to
15:00
Speaker 2: get you to lay out the obstacle that Congress could pose.
15:04
Speaker 2: You know, many of the same people who said, oh,
15:06
Speaker 2: Congress doesn't need to sign off on a war are
15:09
Speaker 2: now the first in line to say, oh, but Congress
15:11
Speaker 2: does have to sign off on the peace. And it
15:13
Speaker 2: is true that some of the sanctions did come through
15:16
Speaker 2: Congress and would probably require Congress to rule them back.
15:18
Speaker 2: Ale though Trump operates in his own way and doesn't always,
15:20
Speaker 2: you know, abide by the law or the rules. So
15:24
Speaker 2: what do you see as the biggest obstacles and how
15:27
Speaker 2: do you understand the political dynamics between Republicans and Democrats
15:32
Speaker 2: and who would be in favor of the sanctions relief
15:34
Speaker 2: and who would be opposed, because to me, it's a
15:35
Speaker 2: little bit murky at this point.
15:38
Speaker 4: Look, first, let me start off by saying that I
15:40
Speaker 4: was deeply disappointed and seeing that some of the Democrats,
15:44
Speaker 4: many of them actually having been very constructive on this
15:47
Speaker 4: issue before, took positions that in my view, were not
15:51
Speaker 4: terribly different from the bad faith positions and accusations that
15:55
Speaker 4: the Republicans did have against the GCPI back in twenty fifteen,
15:59
Speaker 4: and such as the criticism the three hundred billion dollar
16:02
Speaker 4: reconstruction Fund, etc. Making it sound as if there was
16:05
Speaker 4: American money going there, completely disregarding the fact that A
16:10
Speaker 4: this is after the Iranians have suffered three hundred billion
16:13
Speaker 4: plus dollars of damages in this war and there are
16:16
Speaker 4: in dire need of reconstruction. B That this is driven
16:20
Speaker 4: by regional states who have now come to understand that
16:25
Speaker 4: containment of Iran does not work, it eventually leads to war,
16:29
Speaker 4: and as a result, they now want to approach security
16:32
Speaker 4: in a different manner, and they want to try economic
16:35
Speaker 4: integration and interdependence, similar to what Europe did after World
16:39
Speaker 4: War Two with the guidance of the United States with
16:42
Speaker 4: the stealing Cold unit et C. Trying to create so
16:45
Speaker 4: much economic independence so that going to war would just
16:49
Speaker 4: become too costly for all sides. And this is because
16:52
Speaker 4: they experience this war, so they want to do it.
16:54
Speaker 4: They're the ones who are driving this completely disregarded it
16:57
Speaker 4: would be their money that would be used for investments,
17:01
Speaker 4: not American money necessarily, and also forgetting that they themselves
17:05
Speaker 4: on many occasions rightfully have stood by the Iranian people
17:07
Speaker 4: and criticize the repression of the Iranian government, but now
17:11
Speaker 4: are saying, let's not reconstruct this country that has been
17:14
Speaker 4: ravaged by three hundred billion dollars of war damages inflicted
17:17
Speaker 4: by Donald Trump, and at the same time wanting to
17:21
Speaker 4: pretend that they're still standing with the Iranian people who
17:23
Speaker 4: are in dire need of this reconstruction. So I'm very
17:27
Speaker 4: disappointed at but also I'm stunned by the strategic lack
17:32
Speaker 4: of wisdom here, because if they're criticisms amount to enough
17:37
Speaker 4: to actually scuttle the MoU and collapse this pathway out
17:42
Speaker 4: of this war, then the next war that will likely
17:45
Speaker 4: occur because this negotiation fails is a war that the
17:49
Speaker 4: Democrats will also own. It won't just be Trump's war
17:52
Speaker 4: because they helped blow up the exit ramp from this war.
17:56
Speaker 4: So it's just stunning to me that not only have
17:58
Speaker 4: they taken this very reactionary position mirroring what the Republicans
18:04
Speaker 4: did in twenty fifteen, but on top of that, I
18:06
Speaker 4: thought this through a couple of more steps, that this
18:08
Speaker 4: could actually end up really loud for them politically if
18:11
Speaker 4: they're standing in the way of getting a deal. I
18:13
Speaker 4: fully understand that they want to criticize aspects of it,
18:16
Speaker 4: and they certainly don't want to give Trump credit, etc.
18:19
Speaker 4: I think that's totally fine, But the degree and the
18:21
Speaker 4: depth of the intensity that I saw some of these
18:24
Speaker 4: attacks I think go beyond what is warranted. And if
18:27
Speaker 4: you want to criticize it, there's great ways of criticizing
18:30
Speaker 4: it from the left instead of criticizing it from the right,
18:33
Speaker 4: which unfortunately too many of the centrist Democrats tend to do.
18:36
Speaker 3: Now, what could Congress do?
18:37
Speaker 4: First of all, almost all of the secondary sanctions go
18:40
Speaker 4: through Congress, so they would have to lift them if
18:43
Speaker 4: they're part of the deal, which to a certain extent
18:45
Speaker 4: I think is very likely. The primary sanctions are primarily
18:49
Speaker 4: through executive orders, and Trump can lift those on his
18:53
Speaker 4: own without their involvement. A lot of the secondary sanctions
18:57
Speaker 4: become somewhat moved if there isn't a foundation of primary
19:01
Speaker 4: sanctions underneath them, So the necessity of lifting the secondary
19:05
Speaker 4: sanctions may not be that strong.
19:07
Speaker 3: It's a little bit off.
19:08
Speaker 2: You explain that difference. Can you explain that difference between
19:11
Speaker 2: primary and secondary sanctions?
19:12
Speaker 4: Yeah, So the primary sanctions are sanctions that the United
19:16
Speaker 4: States is imposing on American companies wanting to trade or
19:19
Speaker 4: invest in Iran. It includes also a lot of designations,
19:23
Speaker 4: such as designating certain banks for sanctions because of whatever
19:27
Speaker 4: violations they're accused of. Secondary sanctions and what we're telling
19:31
Speaker 4: a Spanish company, even though we don't rule you, we
19:36
Speaker 4: have decided that you are not allowed to trade or
19:39
Speaker 4: invest in Iran because if you do, you lose access
19:42
Speaker 4: to the American market. And those sanctions primarily go through
19:45
Speaker 4: Congress and They are of course very important because they
19:48
Speaker 4: prevent the rest of the world from going into the
19:50
Speaker 4: Irani market. But if the US itself goes into the
19:54
Speaker 4: Iranian markets, you can understand the contradiction of the US
19:57
Speaker 4: being in the Iranian market while prevent other companies from
20:01
Speaker 4: other countries to going in. That's one aspect of it.
20:03
Speaker 4: But the other aspect of it is also is that
20:05
Speaker 4: a lot of the sanctions that are coming through the
20:09
Speaker 4: secondary sanctions are targeting companies or banks that have been
20:14
Speaker 4: designated in primary sanctions. So if you take away the
20:18
Speaker 4: primary sanctions designations, the secondary sanctions essentially become hollow. This
20:22
Speaker 4: is the case is some of them, obviously not in all.
20:25
Speaker 4: But then there's the other aspect, which is Inara, which
20:28
Speaker 4: is that after the GCPA Congress decided that the president
20:32
Speaker 4: had to come to Congress and make sure that he
20:35
Speaker 4: got it approved. But it was a reversal approval, it
20:38
Speaker 4: would have to be a vote of no confidence that
20:40
Speaker 4: would have to have sixty votes, and all the president
20:44
Speaker 4: needed to have back in twenty fifteen was forty votes
20:48
Speaker 4: to make.
20:48
Speaker 3: Sure that that vote of no confidence wouldn't go through.
20:51
Speaker 4: Essentially, but that is in case if it is a
20:54
Speaker 4: nuclear deal, a new variation of the nuclear deal. If
20:58
Speaker 4: you notice, the Trumpet administration has never referred to this
21:01
Speaker 4: as a nucleideal. They're talking about a usc run deal,
21:04
Speaker 4: a transformational deal. I suspect that that is because they're
21:08
Speaker 4: at least hoping that perhaps they can avoid INARA altogether
21:13
Speaker 4: by saying it doesn't meet the definition, because this is
21:16
Speaker 4: not a new clearial.
21:17
Speaker 3: But even if it.
21:18
Speaker 4: Does and they have to go to Congress, the biggest
21:22
Speaker 4: concern I have is not that they wouldn't be able
21:25
Speaker 4: to pass it, or that they wouldn't be able to
21:28
Speaker 4: defeat a resolution of no confidence, but rather that this
21:33
Speaker 4: will just add more time to the clock and would
21:36
Speaker 4: create more problems and delays more than anything else, because
21:40
Speaker 4: and I really do hope that they try to wrap
21:42
Speaker 4: this up as quickly as possible. Let me tell you
21:45
Speaker 4: one reason why the JCPA essentially ended up taking roughly
21:50
Speaker 4: a year longer than they should have, because the two
21:52
Speaker 4: sides were just over negotiating by the time it was struck,
21:56
Speaker 4: and by the time the implementation started there was such
22:00
Speaker 4: fatigue in the White House with Yvon They had focused
22:02
Speaker 4: so much on Ivan at the expense of other issues,
22:04
Speaker 4: but he also left to Obama administration with very little
22:07
Speaker 4: time to do proper implementation of the deal. Interesting, and
22:12
Speaker 4: then it made it easier for the next administration to
22:14
Speaker 4: uproot it. So if they managed to get this done
22:18
Speaker 4: fast and give enough time of implementation and anchoring of
22:22
Speaker 4: this deal, it will make it more difficult for any
22:24
Speaker 4: future administration if they were to choose to go against
22:27
Speaker 4: this to be able to uproot it. And having had
22:30
Speaker 4: that experience, I think they should be very careful not
22:32
Speaker 4: to repeat that mistake.
22:34
Speaker 2: Well, Doctor truth Parsi as always value your analysis so much.
22:39
Speaker 5: Thank you so much for taking the time this morning.
22:40
Speaker 3: Thank you so much for having me. I appreciate it.
22:44
Speaker 2: A new extraordinary report in the Washingtost details just how
22:50
Speaker 2: much Tulsi Gabbared, especially in the early days of her
22:53
Speaker 2: political career, used the verbatim talking points that came from
22:59
Speaker 2: her cult guru. This is a Washington Post report by
23:02
Speaker 2: John Swain. We can put this up on the screen.
23:05
Speaker 2: The headline here is Tulsi Gabbard, her guru and the
23:08
Speaker 2: mysterious messages that helped.
23:10
Speaker 5: Shape her political career.
23:12
Speaker 2: And the journalist who tracked all of this down in
23:15
Speaker 2: an extraordinary investigation. John Swain joins us. Now, John, welcome,
23:19
Speaker 2: great to have you, Thanks for having me. Yeah, of course,
23:23
Speaker 2: so I would. This is the story of how you
23:26
Speaker 2: came across all of these memos being exchanged is incredible.
23:30
Speaker 2: The content of the memos themselves is extraordinary. So why
23:33
Speaker 2: don't we start with the backstory here of how you
23:36
Speaker 2: stumbled upon this story, how you dug into it and
23:38
Speaker 2: were able to come up with this treasure trove of communications.
23:42
Speaker 7: Sure so, there has been good coverage in recent years
23:45
Speaker 7: about the fact that Telsy Gabbart grew up in this
23:48
Speaker 7: faith group, the Science of Identity Foundation, But there was
23:51
Speaker 7: still this sort of central mystery of whether that mattered
23:54
Speaker 7: and what if any influence her guru, Chris Butler, who's
23:58
Speaker 7: the leader of the group, on her and on her politics.
24:03
Speaker 7: And so when she was nominated to be Director of
24:05
Speaker 7: National Intelligence excuse me by Donald Trump, we at the
24:09
Speaker 7: Post decided we should try and answer that question, and
24:12
Speaker 7: I looked into it. In November twenty twenty four, I
24:14
Speaker 7: went to Hawaii. I tried to speak with people and
24:17
Speaker 7: kind of struck out. I got pretty much nowhere. No
24:19
Speaker 7: one wanted to talk to me. I got asked to
24:21
Speaker 7: leave the street where the Guru lives by the police,
24:24
Speaker 7: and I kind of had to move on. And nine
24:28
Speaker 7: months later, someone from the group, a member of the
24:31
Speaker 7: group who I had spoken with originally and had sort
24:34
Speaker 7: of played down the importance of the group and the
24:37
Speaker 7: importance of the Guru to Tolsi Gabbard, she got back
24:40
Speaker 7: in touch her named Rebecca Salzburg, and she basically told me,
24:43
Speaker 7: you know, I didn't really give you the full story
24:45
Speaker 7: last time, And over the course of weeks she told
24:49
Speaker 7: me how she had actually worked very closely with Tossy
24:52
Speaker 7: Gabbard on her election campaigns and had worked for and
24:56
Speaker 7: with the Guru. She'd had meetings with him and spoken
24:59
Speaker 7: with him. And to cut a long story short, some
25:03
Speaker 7: questions I asked her prompted her to log into an
25:07
Speaker 7: old Gmail account that she had, and in that inbox,
25:11
Speaker 7: remarkably were hundreds of memos which documented advice and guidance
25:17
Speaker 7: directives talking points to Tulsy Gabbart from the years when
25:21
Speaker 7: she was in Congress.
25:23
Speaker 2: Now, the pushback that came from this faith group, some
25:27
Speaker 2: may say cult. I guess I'll leave it to the
25:29
Speaker 2: viewers to decide how they want to characterize it was effectively,
25:33
Speaker 2: these memos that you got your hand on, they're unsigned.
25:35
Speaker 5: You don't know who they came from.
25:37
Speaker 2: You don't know, you know, you don't know what this
25:39
Speaker 2: guidance directly, where it directly came from. So how did
25:43
Speaker 2: you go about ascertaining that pretty likely these memos were
25:47
Speaker 2: coming from the leader of the faith group himself.
25:51
Speaker 7: So, first of all, Rebecca Seltzburg, the source I mentioned
25:55
Speaker 7: from the start, said, you know, she understood these to
25:57
Speaker 7: be from the Guru, Chris Butler. She was one of
25:59
Speaker 7: theirs of these documents. There was a small political team
26:02
Speaker 7: around the Guru, including Rebecca and Telsey's parents and a
26:06
Speaker 7: few other select disciples of the Guru. And she was
26:09
Speaker 7: Adham And you know, these are all from Butler, and
26:11
Speaker 7: the reason they're unsigned is precisely to protect him in
26:15
Speaker 7: the event that a reporter or someone else got hold
26:18
Speaker 7: of them. And there are hundreds of them, and in
26:21
Speaker 7: nineteen of them I managed to find that there were
26:25
Speaker 7: indirect identifications self identifications that showed it was Butler. There
26:30
Speaker 7: would be times when the unsigned or the unnamed voice
26:34
Speaker 7: would be talking to Tulsi and saying, you know, I'm
26:36
Speaker 7: your Guru you're my disciple, that sort of thing, and
26:38
Speaker 7: so in those ones it was obvious that it was Butler,
26:41
Speaker 7: as you said, the group basically said, well, sure, but
26:44
Speaker 7: all the other ones are not him, and it didn't
26:47
Speaker 7: really didn't really seem to like hold much water. All
26:50
Speaker 7: of the documents were formatted exactly they're saying. There was
26:52
Speaker 7: nothing to distinguish the other ones from the ones where
26:55
Speaker 7: Butler did self identify. So it wasn't really clear to
26:58
Speaker 7: me how people receiving them supposed to sort of distinguish
27:02
Speaker 7: who were speaking, if not only one person. And there
27:07
Speaker 7: were clues dotted around various documents. You know, there was
27:10
Speaker 7: this one hundred and seventy three page dossier of policy
27:13
Speaker 7: advice for Tossi on all sorts of different things, and
27:17
Speaker 7: deep within it was just this offhand reminiscence about working
27:21
Speaker 7: as a teenager in Hawaii and the Guru grew up
27:24
Speaker 7: in Hawaii. The two other people that the group claimed
27:27
Speaker 7: were behind these things did not, and so every piece
27:31
Speaker 7: of information that pointed towards someone in particular pointed toward
27:34
Speaker 7: the Guru and to not someone else. There was never
27:37
Speaker 7: any counter indication among these documents, and so we feel
27:42
Speaker 7: that the evidence is pretty weighty, Rebecca. The source who
27:44
Speaker 7: gave us the documents is adamant, and you know says
27:47
Speaker 7: that they were butler, and we lay out the kind
27:51
Speaker 7: of the case as to why in the story.
27:54
Speaker 2: So some people may say, okay, well, you know, political candidates,
27:57
Speaker 2: they get advice from a variety of places.
28:00
Speaker 5: What's the big deal?
28:01
Speaker 2: And I think one of the things that's very compelling
28:04
Speaker 2: in your piece is you're able to track down these
28:07
Speaker 2: memos and the language that is offered in the memos
28:11
Speaker 2: with direct verbatim tweets that were put out by Tulsi
28:15
Speaker 2: and also with specific language that she used in her
28:19
Speaker 2: media appearances. You pulled one example from a CNN media
28:23
Speaker 2: appearance at the time where the language is almost verbatim
28:26
Speaker 2: what was suggested in the memo that appears to come
28:28
Speaker 2: from her guru. This is c three guys, let's go
28:31
Speaker 2: ahead and play this so people can take a look.
28:33
Speaker 1: The issue here is not about me saying, boo, who,
28:37
Speaker 1: I'm going to miss the party.
28:43
Speaker 2: So for those who are just listening, there's a visual
28:46
Speaker 2: comparison here of her language boo who, I'm not going
28:48
Speaker 2: to miss the party, or I'm going to miss the
28:50
Speaker 2: party with the language from the Guru, which also included boo,
28:54
Speaker 2: who I'm going to miss the party? So and this
28:57
Speaker 2: was not an isolated instance. Talk about the overallapp and
29:01
Speaker 2: how significant this advice was, how much Tolsi seemed to
29:05
Speaker 2: adhere to what she was being told to do, instructed
29:08
Speaker 2: to do via these memos.
29:11
Speaker 7: Yeah, I think we already three things, three areas that make
29:14
Speaker 7: it unusual and different to the usual situation that you
29:18
Speaker 7: mentioned where people have advisors who give them advice and
29:21
Speaker 7: sort of suggest things. One the talking points memos that
29:25
Speaker 7: you just talked about, where we found thirty two talking
29:29
Speaker 7: points documents for specific interviews she was to give, and
29:33
Speaker 7: in twenty four instances, a colleague and I, Aaron Schaeffer,
29:36
Speaker 7: went through the transcripts compared them with the talking points.
29:39
Speaker 7: We found that she'd used almost for beatim phrasing from
29:42
Speaker 7: these documents and the other eight times similar ideas. You know,
29:46
Speaker 7: that's pretty remarkable. I think you know politicians, the principle
29:50
Speaker 7: in that relationship between advisor and politician gets advice and
29:56
Speaker 7: steers on where they should go and what they should avoid.
29:59
Speaker 7: But you know, to use verbatim phrasing from one person
30:04
Speaker 7: it seemed seemed unusual. The second area is that in
30:08
Speaker 7: some of these memos we see remarkably specific instructions, you know,
30:13
Speaker 7: release a press release tomorrow on this, then propose a bill.
30:16
Speaker 7: And sure enough, the next day she releases a press
30:18
Speaker 7: release and then a week after proposes a bill in
30:21
Speaker 7: exactly the same terms as the memo recommended. And I
30:24
Speaker 7: think the third area that really sets it apart from
30:27
Speaker 7: this usual advisors of politician relationship is this sharp criticism,
30:32
Speaker 7: this harsh language that the unnamed advisor who outsource says
30:37
Speaker 7: is Butler criticizing Tulsy Gabbart for her poor performance as
30:42
Speaker 7: he saw it. So he uses expectives to tell her
30:46
Speaker 7: no one cared about her response to Barack Obama's State
30:50
Speaker 7: of the Union speech, tells her that she's mealy mouthed,
30:53
Speaker 7: that she's lazy, she hasn't done her homework. And you know,
30:57
Speaker 7: people I speak with say, that's pretty unusual for an
31:00
Speaker 7: advisor to be being quite so bold in sort of
31:04
Speaker 7: in slapping down a member of Congress and telling them
31:06
Speaker 7: basically that they suck. Yeah, so you know that in
31:10
Speaker 7: those three ways, it really seemed to be more than usual.
31:15
Speaker 2: You also document and your source. Rebecca was part of
31:18
Speaker 2: an effort to create sort of inorganic you know, anonymous
31:21
Speaker 2: accounts or I guess, you know, with pseudonyms, fake accounts
31:26
Speaker 2: to back up and go to bat for Tulsi and
31:28
Speaker 2: various social media platforms. So that part is significant as well.
31:31
Speaker 2: But to your point about the language, I mean, some
31:33
Speaker 2: of it was really borderline abusive. It actually made me
31:36
Speaker 2: feel some sympathy for her because it's long and known.
31:39
Speaker 2: You know, she was raised in this group, her parents
31:41
Speaker 2: were high up in this group. Chris Butler has apparently
31:44
Speaker 2: been long been interested in politics randostly to candidates in Hawaii, so.
31:49
Speaker 5: These pieces were known.
31:51
Speaker 2: But to see the sort of like you know, like
31:54
Speaker 2: humiliating language there also gave a little bit of a
31:57
Speaker 2: sense of the way the mechanisms of control seemed to
32:02
Speaker 2: work here, you know, where you would you would degrade someone.
32:05
Speaker 2: I remember at one point I think he said something like,
32:07
Speaker 2: don't worry no matter how much you screw up tomorrow,
32:10
Speaker 2: me and Krishna will still love you. Things like that
32:13
Speaker 2: that just seems sort of like classic manipulative and abusive techniques.
32:18
Speaker 2: I wanted you to respond to one of the criticisms
32:21
Speaker 2: I saw of your piece, which is that this is
32:24
Speaker 2: you know, this is anti Hindu bigotry, that if this
32:27
Speaker 2: was a Christian group, you wouldn't single them out for
32:30
Speaker 2: such scrutiny in this same way, which personally, I think
32:33
Speaker 2: if there is a Christian group operating this way, and
32:35
Speaker 2: Christian groups are very influential in our politics, they should
32:38
Speaker 2: receive this level of scrutiny. But I wonder what is
32:40
Speaker 2: your response to that allegation.
32:44
Speaker 7: It's pretty much what you just said. You know, if
32:46
Speaker 7: this were a Christian group and we got hold of
32:48
Speaker 7: these documents that documented quite such harsh criticism and direct instructions,
32:55
Speaker 7: we would do the story that It would just make
32:56
Speaker 7: no difference. And Telsey Gabbitt has long said Chris Butler
33:01
Speaker 7: is her spiritual teacher and likened him to an imam,
33:05
Speaker 7: a priest, a rabbi.
33:08
Speaker 3: I think the.
33:09
Speaker 7: Piece makes pretty clear that this goes way beyond the
33:12
Speaker 7: usual relationship with a faith leader. And to come back
33:15
Speaker 7: around to what we were just both saying, if any rabbi,
33:18
Speaker 7: priest immam were being quite so direct and quite so
33:22
Speaker 7: harsh with a member of Congress, we would do the
33:25
Speaker 7: story or the same. It has no difference.
33:28
Speaker 2: Last question, for you is on the timing, because it
33:31
Speaker 2: is a little bit unfortunate. Now we're learning all this
33:33
Speaker 2: and she's out of the job. Her removal, resignation, how
33:39
Speaker 2: we want to characterize it from her position as DN
33:41
Speaker 2: I came shortly after your you know, your reporting on
33:45
Speaker 2: this story was set to drop. So what do you
33:48
Speaker 2: make of that timing? Was that incidental? Was that related
33:51
Speaker 2: to your piece? And why was there I know you've
33:54
Speaker 2: been working on this for months. I'm not trying to
33:56
Speaker 2: impune you here whatsoever, but I'm just curious about the
33:58
Speaker 2: timing of how this works out, because for those of
34:01
Speaker 2: us on the outside, it's like, oh dang, now that
34:03
Speaker 2: she's gone, we know all these things.
34:06
Speaker 7: Sure, so you're right, Like I, in late May sent
34:08
Speaker 7: her and her representatives a whole load of questions again
34:12
Speaker 7: and said, you know, we're probably going to go ahead
34:14
Speaker 7: with this. We would like your responses, and I gave
34:17
Speaker 7: her to a five pm Friday to respond, and one
34:20
Speaker 7: pm Friday it was announced she was resigning. I don't
34:23
Speaker 7: know anything beyond that connection, honestly, she says. You know,
34:27
Speaker 7: it seems like her husband sadly was diagnosed with her
34:30
Speaker 7: serious cancer and he's receiving treatment, and that's what she
34:33
Speaker 7: said she was leaving to do to support him. So,
34:36
Speaker 7: you know, the timing may be coincidental. I honestly don't
34:39
Speaker 7: know in terms.
34:40
Speaker 8: Of the timing.
34:40
Speaker 7: Yeah, it is a tough thing in the in journalism
34:44
Speaker 7: where you try and get the story out as soon
34:46
Speaker 7: as you can, but it has to be ready and
34:48
Speaker 7: you know, to be honest. In March, when I first
34:51
Speaker 7: went to Telsey Gabbin, into the group and to other
34:54
Speaker 7: people ending the story, they came back with this claim
34:57
Speaker 7: that the memos were not from the good And although
35:01
Speaker 7: I felt there was evidence at odds with that, we
35:04
Speaker 7: had to take that seriously because that's what they say.
35:06
Speaker 7: And so I had to spend a lot more time
35:09
Speaker 7: digging into that seeing whether there was any way that
35:12
Speaker 7: what they were saying was born out in the evidence
35:15
Speaker 7: in the documents, and you know, I didn't find anything
35:17
Speaker 7: that supported their version. But we you know, as you know,
35:22
Speaker 7: we all get a lot of abuse from politicians for
35:25
Speaker 7: rushing to the story and not giving their side of
35:28
Speaker 7: the story. We wanted to take their side of the
35:29
Speaker 7: story seriously, and we had to do that until it
35:32
Speaker 7: was ready and until we had all the responses.
35:34
Speaker 2: We needed John fantastic work on this. I really recommend
35:38
Speaker 2: that people read the entire piece because I think it
35:41
Speaker 2: is quite extraordinary, both like I said, in terms of
35:43
Speaker 2: how you ended up with this trope, but also, of course,
35:46
Speaker 2: most importantly, what it reveals about the way that Telsey
35:49
Speaker 2: Gabbard appears to have been operating.
35:51
Speaker 5: Thank you so much for joining us. I'm really grateful.
35:54
Speaker 3: Thank you. So.
35:57
Speaker 9: A while back, we promised that we would do more
36:00
Speaker 9: coverage of the conflict that's raging in Sudan, and then
36:04
Speaker 9: another massive war broke out as that one is receding,
36:08
Speaker 9: the war between hopefully receding between the us A RUN
36:11
Speaker 9: and Israel HESBLA. We wanted to pick back up on
36:15
Speaker 9: some of that coverage, and particularly at this moment because
36:19
Speaker 9: you can roll E one here, the RSF, which is
36:24
Speaker 9: the UI funded kind of rebel group in Sudan, is
36:29
Speaker 9: threatening to take on as threatened to an incredible massacre
36:35
Speaker 9: in l Obayed. So previously, as we reported when the
36:39
Speaker 9: RSF took over this city called l Fasher, the amount
36:42
Speaker 9: of bloodshed and put up E two. Now, the amount
36:45
Speaker 9: of bloodshed is difficult to calculate. There there are estimates
36:50
Speaker 9: that range well into the tens of thousands, if not,
36:52
Speaker 9: if not even above one hundred thousand, and the number
36:55
Speaker 9: of people killed, the the.
36:58
Speaker 8: Mass graves that were visible from the air.
37:03
Speaker 9: We have We've spoken to guests here who did satellite
37:06
Speaker 9: an analysis there where you and you could just you
37:08
Speaker 9: could see it literally from outer space, the amount of
37:12
Speaker 9: mass murder by this UEE backed massive death squad. And
37:17
Speaker 9: now they're on the precipice of doing it again, as
37:21
Speaker 9: as the world just just continues to watch.
37:26
Speaker 8: We can put up E three.
37:28
Speaker 9: This is Nathaniel Raymond, who's the head of Yale's Humanitarian
37:32
Speaker 9: Research Lab, which has been doing the most significant work
37:36
Speaker 9: kind of analyzing and trying to bring attention to this
37:39
Speaker 9: to this crisis, this crisis and this looming massacre which
37:43
Speaker 9: again there are hundreds of tens or hundreds of thousands
37:47
Speaker 9: of people alive right now who may not be very
37:49
Speaker 9: soon if if the world doesn't do something to stop
37:51
Speaker 9: the UE's backed forces here.
37:53
Speaker 3: So she so he.
37:54
Speaker 9: Testified in front of a UK committee saying that you know,
37:59
Speaker 9: they effectively What he's saying is that if if anybody
38:02
Speaker 9: just says anything about the UAE here, just one word,
38:06
Speaker 9: just say something and highlight the fact that the UAE
38:11
Speaker 9: is facilitating this. It will raise the cost to them
38:14
Speaker 9: of doing it such that it just simply may not happen.
38:19
Speaker 8: Now we can put up E four here.
38:23
Speaker 9: The State Department has issued a warning that this master
38:28
Speaker 9: as possible. They write, there are alarming indications that mass
38:31
Speaker 9: atrocities could be imminent, further worsening Sudan's already catastrophic humanitarian
38:37
Speaker 9: crisis unquote it's and then they call on RSF and
38:41
Speaker 9: their allies, but they again not mentioning the UAE. And
38:46
Speaker 9: as drop Site reports here, previously, we've been able to
38:51
Speaker 9: track military cargo shipments that went from the UA to
38:54
Speaker 9: Libya and then move from there into Sudan, so there's
38:58
Speaker 9: no mystery about what's happening here now. Julian Andreoni, my
39:03
Speaker 9: drop Site reporter up on the Hill, caught up with
39:06
Speaker 9: Chris van Holland, who has probably been the center who's
39:09
Speaker 9: been most outspoken on this in the house, it's been
39:11
Speaker 9: Sarah Jacobs and asked him both about the UA's role
39:15
Speaker 9: and what he thinks can be done to try to
39:17
Speaker 9: prevent this.
39:18
Speaker 8: Let's roll that we just need to keep the pressure on.
39:21
Speaker 10: I mean they're obviously, you know, we need to keep
39:26
Speaker 10: showing the hypocrisy of the Trump administration policy where they
39:32
Speaker 10: claim they want to do something but refuse to take
39:36
Speaker 10: some of the basic actions we could.
39:38
Speaker 3: Take as a country. We just need to keep the
39:39
Speaker 3: pressure on.
39:40
Speaker 11: So I saw your statement about the six thousand civilians
39:44
Speaker 11: who were killed by the RSF in October. Now there's
39:48
Speaker 11: five hundred thousand more at risk. I'm wondering whether you've
39:51
Speaker 11: spoken with the ambassador to the UAE or what the
39:55
Speaker 11: progress is with that.
39:56
Speaker 3: Well.
39:57
Speaker 10: I have in the past, but more recently, as part
40:01
Speaker 10: of a Senate Foreign Relations Committee markup on a bill
40:05
Speaker 10: dealing with Sudan, I propose two amendments. The first amendment
40:10
Speaker 10: would be to say that the United States will not
40:13
Speaker 10: sell transfer military equipment to the UEE so long as
40:16
Speaker 10: the UAE continues to finance the murder's RSF organization, which
40:23
Speaker 10: has been responsible for these huge atrocities. And the transcript
40:28
Speaker 10: will be available pretty soon. But nobody seemed to object
40:33
Speaker 10: on the merits, but Republicans all voted no on that,
40:39
Speaker 10: some Democrats voted now so offered another amendment that said
40:43
Speaker 10: any party that is fueling the war in Sudan.
40:49
Speaker 9: And so in order to be able to carry out
40:53
Speaker 9: this extraordinary level of violence around the world, particularly in Sudan,
40:58
Speaker 9: while also maintaining a decent image globally, the UE engages
41:03
Speaker 9: in some of the most aggressive what they call sports
41:05
Speaker 9: washing in the country, and that's through their financing of
41:08
Speaker 9: both the NBA and also a bunch of different football teams.
41:11
Speaker 8: Want to roll real quickly.
41:13
Speaker 9: This is Jeremy kanan Dyke, who's the president of Refugees International,
41:18
Speaker 9: talking about the way that even mom Donnie with an
41:22
Speaker 9: Arsenal jersey with for that NBA never and never raising
41:27
Speaker 9: the level of involvement that the UE has with these
41:30
Speaker 9: now has some level of complicity as well.
41:32
Speaker 8: Let's roll this.
41:34
Speaker 3: Another question came in, did Mayor mom Donnie send the
41:37
Speaker 3: wrong message with his Arsenal away jersey at eed seems
41:40
Speaker 3: he'd be an ally to your efforts.
41:43
Speaker 12: Yeah, we saw that for sure. We're going to reach
41:47
Speaker 12: out to his office. I think what it underscores is
41:51
Speaker 12: just how you know how effective the sports washing approach is. Right,
41:56
Speaker 12: people put an Arsenal jersey on, they put an NBA
41:58
Speaker 12: jersey on, They don't even think about what it says
42:01
Speaker 12: on the front. It's just that they don't think about
42:03
Speaker 12: what that implies and what they are part of when
42:06
Speaker 12: they do that. And so I think what we that
42:08
Speaker 12: is also the importance of a campaign like this one
42:12
Speaker 12: if people become aware, just as John described in the
42:15
Speaker 12: case with Rondo, people become aware of what they are
42:18
Speaker 12: representing when they have that on the front of their shirt,
42:21
Speaker 12: what that means, what they are part of, why that
42:23
Speaker 12: name is on there. I think there will be a backlash,
42:28
Speaker 12: and you know, I do hope mayor Mom Donnie will
42:31
Speaker 12: try to engage him on that. I got to think
42:34
Speaker 12: he would be sympathetic to understanding why that's problematic.
42:38
Speaker 13: And the unique thing about Dan about about the NBA
42:43
Speaker 13: is that and we mentioned this already, but it's this
42:45
Speaker 13: history of support for social justice causes, particularly racial justice,
42:50
Speaker 13: and when we're talking about genocide, that's the current in
42:52
Speaker 13: the student genocide is the deliberate destruction of people's lives
42:56
Speaker 13: and the livelihoods on the basis of their identity, the race,
43:00
Speaker 13: their ethnicity. This is exactly what the RSF is doing.
43:03
Speaker 13: This is the group that the UAE has decided to
43:07
Speaker 13: support in the Sudan conflict. The war would not be
43:12
Speaker 13: as remotely as destructive to human life if the UA
43:16
Speaker 13: was not involved in it.
43:18
Speaker 8: That's the news.
43:19
Speaker 9: The UAE is on the cusp of carrying out a
43:24
Speaker 9: horrific massacre and elevated has it happened yet, doesn't.
43:29
Speaker 8: Have to happen.
43:30
Speaker 9: But if none of the countries that are allies with
43:33
Speaker 9: the UE say a word to them about it, it's
43:36
Speaker 9: going to happen.
43:37
Speaker 2: And the world will once again stand by and watch.
43:41
Speaker 2: And you do have some countries, as you point out,
43:43
Speaker 2: like the US, that are willing to say like, don't
43:45
Speaker 2: slaughter civilians, but unwilling to put any culpability or use
43:51
Speaker 2: any of the immense leverage and pressure that could be
43:54
Speaker 2: brought to bear to stop the arming of the RSF.
43:58
Speaker 2: And just to give people a little bit more detail
44:01
Speaker 2: and texture here of what's going on if they haven't
44:03
Speaker 2: followed this closely. So first of all, the reason this
44:06
Speaker 2: particular city is really, you know, is even more consequential,
44:10
Speaker 2: is because you have mass displacement already of you know,
44:14
Speaker 2: people who are now refugees within Sudan and also externally
44:18
Speaker 2: from Sudan, and this city, l Obaid is one of
44:22
Speaker 2: the primary places where people have gathered where internally displaced
44:26
Speaker 2: people have already gone. So you have you showed earlier
44:30
Speaker 2: the images of people intense. You know, these are people
44:32
Speaker 2: who have already been forced to flee their homes and
44:35
Speaker 2: estimates are you know, one hundred thousand plus who are
44:38
Speaker 2: now congregated in this city which is effectively experiencing a
44:41
Speaker 2: siege at this point, and all these RSF forces are amassing.
44:47
Speaker 2: It's also I think people will understand why the UIE
44:50
Speaker 2: is involved and other regional players are involved here too,
44:52
Speaker 2: because Sudan has this critical geostrategic location on the Red Sea.
44:58
Speaker 2: And so given we can appu what we've learned with
45:00
Speaker 2: regard to Iran and the Straight of Horn moves to
45:03
Speaker 2: understanding why there is such a rush to fund the
45:06
Speaker 2: sizes of the sides of this uh, this war this horrific.
45:10
Speaker 2: You can't really even call it a civil war because
45:12
Speaker 2: it's really not about the people there. You know, the
45:13
Speaker 2: democratic movement was displaced by these you know what were
45:18
Speaker 2: once in concert, these two military sides that then split
45:21
Speaker 2: off from each other after they successfully executed this this
45:25
Speaker 2: military coup. So there really is no side that's like
45:28
Speaker 2: the good side or on the side of the people
45:30
Speaker 2: they're just different forms of military dictatorship that want to
45:33
Speaker 2: be implemented here. So in any case, there's you know,
45:36
Speaker 2: it's a geostrategic positioning, it's about fight for natural resources.
45:41
Speaker 2: There are ethnic you know, divisions that are certainly at
45:43
Speaker 2: play here. The RSAF is basically like an Arab a
45:46
Speaker 2: group of Arab supremacist death squad is effectively what I
45:50
Speaker 2: would what I would call it. But in any case,
45:53
Speaker 2: that's why so many countries have interested themselves, including the UAE,
45:58
Speaker 2: in you know, this war and in fueling this this
46:02
Speaker 2: violence and these mass atrocities.
46:05
Speaker 9: Right, And meanwhile the Trump and his family are just
46:08
Speaker 9: completely on the take from the UE. It would be
46:13
Speaker 9: nice if Trump was like, oh, hey, and this will
46:15
Speaker 9: be my thirty seventh war that I could end and
46:17
Speaker 9: so I can get you know, another FIFA Peace Prize
46:20
Speaker 9: or whatever. But when he hears the UE's involvement, he's like, oh,
46:23
Speaker 9: never mind, yeah, yeah.
46:25
Speaker 8: Like it's the level of corruption.
46:28
Speaker 9: It's is kind of unprecedented to have a president that
46:31
Speaker 9: is disconflicted that you know, he's literally.
46:35
Speaker 2: It's kind of unprecedented. I think it is unprecedented. I
46:38
Speaker 2: don't think you've ever seen anything equivalent or even remotely equivalent.
46:42
Speaker 8: Nothing, nothing, nothing, Yeah, it's yeah. And so.
46:49
Speaker 9: Unless people start raising the cost for the UEE of
46:54
Speaker 9: doing this, they're going to keep doing it.
46:56
Speaker 3: Yep.
46:57
Speaker 9: And and it wouldn't it's not that hard to raise
46:59
Speaker 9: the cost. They don't want any attention on this right now.
47:03
Speaker 9: They're getting none. If there's just a little makes it
47:06
Speaker 9: very hard for them to keep doing well.
47:09
Speaker 2: Shout out to Chris van Holland and Sarah Jacobs for
47:12
Speaker 2: doing all that they can from the House and the
47:14
Speaker 2: Senate with very little backup, and you know, with a
47:17
Speaker 2: lot of odds against them. So you know, make sure
47:19
Speaker 2: you guys are engaging with your members of Congress to
47:22
Speaker 2: encourage them to sign on to these efforts. And we
47:25
Speaker 2: are going to push the Elon versus Row conversation to
47:29
Speaker 2: tomorrow because we had too much to say about the
47:32
Speaker 2: elections from last night.
47:33
Speaker 5: I think people will be okay with that. But I
47:35
Speaker 5: have a.
47:35
Speaker 2: Feeling that Roe and Elon the world's first trill leader
47:39
Speaker 2: will still be fighting tomorrow as it seems like it's going,
47:42
Speaker 2: so we can cover that then. And I'm sure we're
47:44
Speaker 2: also going to get into a lot of there's just
47:46
Speaker 2: I have so much to say about what's going to
47:48
Speaker 2: happen and the media reaction and the Democrat establish and
47:51
Speaker 2: freak out. That's going to be very juicy to dive
47:53
Speaker 2: into tomorrow as well. So be me and Ryan back
47:56
Speaker 2: here again tomorrow. Any last thoughts, Ryan.
47:59
Speaker 8: Nope, looking forward to it.
48:02
Speaker 2: All right, Body, get some rest and get some rest.
48:05
Speaker 2: I'll see you back here tomorrow, and see you guys
48:06
Speaker 2: back here tomorrow.
48:07
Speaker 5: Took h