Joe Kent - The Real Reason He's Sounding the Alarm on Israel and Iran | SRS #291

Welcome back, man.

>> Thanks for having me. Great to be here.

>> It's an honor to have you. So, you you resigned last week.

>> I did. I did.

>> How's that going?

>> About as good as resigning to the president can go. I think

>> it's definitely created a lot of buzz. I

just I just want to commend you, man. I mean,

I know that took a lot of courage. That

took some serious balls um to do that, especially with the statement you made.

Wow. And um you know, internally, but just me myself, I I haven't been happy about really much of anything that's been going on. I feel like it's been a

180 bait and switch from what we were told in just about every aspect.

And I've been wondering cuz I know there's people frustrated up there and I've been wondering what what are you still doing in the position if you're not doing the job that you were

supposed to do? Why are you still there?

Is it power? Is it is it cuz it's not power. They might think it's power, but

power. They might think it's power, but if you are not able to do the job that you're there to do, then you're powerless, right?

>> That's the conclusion that I came to. I

mean, a after a year of really, you know, trying as hard as we could to advance what we believed the agenda was in particular, keeping us out of of

endless wars, um, and preventing, you know, more bloodshed overseas and then potentially more blowback terrorism here, um, you know, I just felt like we weren't being effective. I wasn't being

effective anymore. And so, for me, it's

effective anymore. And so, for me, it's like I don't want to stay just because I have a title, some degree of, I don't know, prestige, whatever. Um, I don't want to stay for that. I want to stay for the mission. But then also just seeing, and I'm sure we'll get into it,

the things I mentioned in the in the resignation letter. Seeing the way we're

resignation letter. Seeing the way we're being slowwalked and then rapidly entering this war, I had to say something about it. I I had to I couldn't number one, I couldn't be a

part of it. Once the coffin started coming back um from from do uh from overseas to do I just couldn't be a part of it just based on all the experiences

I had had previously um because I you know had said to myself years ago if I was ever in a position to prevent us from getting involved in a in a quagmire I I wouldn't be quiet about it. I would

say something about it and and so that that weighed heavily on me. Um, but then I truly believe, like I said in the letter that the way that the president was influenced by uh the media, but then

also by Israeli government officials and the way that that decision-m was uh took place in a compartmentalized environment. Compartmentalized in the

environment. Compartmentalized in the sense that the president didn't have a bunch of didn't have much in terms of people giving him alternative viewpoints.

um that our country was in a bad spot and the most effective thing that I could do was resign and resign publicly.

>> You you're getting a ton of hate and and you're being attacked. The FBI is coming after you. You've been accused of

after you. You've been accused of leaking. You've been accused of all

leaking. You've been accused of all kinds of all kinds of stuff. It's

ridiculous in my mind. But, you know, I think the one thing that you've been accused of the most is is I mean, people are pissed that you called Israel out.

>> They're really, really upset and they make it sound like there's zero justification for that. But,

>> you know, I have a couple of things right here that I want to read off. I

mean, you're saying that the administration president himself is was influenced to strike Iran for Israel's benefit. I

mean, Rubio said that we hit them because Israel was going to hit them first. Then the Wall Street Journal had

first. Then the Wall Street Journal had an article out uh I think it was last week, maybe the week before, and this is this is quoted.

To help make the case on Iran, Lindsey Graham traveled several times to Israel in recent weeks, meeting with members of countries of the country's intelligence

agency. This is this is in quotation.

agency. This is this is in quotation.

They tell me things our own government won't tell me. He said he spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu coaching him on how to lobby the

president for action. Netanyahu showed

the president intelligence that persuaded Trump to go ahead. Graham

said, I mean this is it's ruters. About

an hour ago today, ruters. Less than 48 hours before the USIsraeli strike on Iran began, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke by phone to President

Donald Trump about the reasons for launching the kind of complex far off the faroff war the American leader once had campaigned against. I mean, it's

it's not absurd that you're saying that the president's being influenced by Israel at all. All the publications are talking about this. Everyone's talking

about this. Senator Lindsey Graham is actually bragging about this. Ted Cruz

was what? Ted Cruz was on the flight.

>> Yep.

>> So, what how is this like some kind of up conspiracy? Like all the signs.

conspiracy? Like all the signs.

>> Yeah. They're they're trying to shut people up by saying you're you're a conspiracy theorist. Um you're

conspiracy theorist. Um you're anti-semitic, etc. But yet they will come out and they will say we had to attack Iran because Israel was going to attack Iran. I mean Secretary of State

attack Iran. I mean Secretary of State Rubio said that the president said it.

Many others have as well. So it's it's right there up in our face. Um and so again for me it was just something that I I I couldn't uh I felt like I couldn't influence anymore from the inside and I could no longer be a part of.

>> But it's insane. I mean and even if do you know Israel spent 6.4 billion on this war since March. You know how much the US has spent? 18 approximately 18 to

25 billion with another request for another 200 billion from Congress.

>> Now why the are we the ones pay floating in the bill for this? Ex the

way it is every time the >> the Israelis will have their objectives.

They will convince senior American officials that this is also their objectives. And if the Americans don't

objectives. And if the Americans don't agree, then the Israelis will set off a series of actions that make us react.

And the next thing you know, we're having to contribute our blood and our treasure. And that same playbook is

treasure. And that same playbook is playing out now. And I I referenced the Iraq war. I referenced what happened in

Iraq war. I referenced what happened in in Syria as well in my letter because this is the same playbook we've seen over and over again. And you know, you and I saw it at the tactical level when we were deployed in the war on terror.

And then now I saw it at at pretty senior levels take place over the course of the last year.

>> We're going to get into all this. I want

to I want to start by reading President Trump's statement today on truth. I am

pleased to report that the United States of America and the country of Iran have had over the last two days very good and productive conversations regarding a

complete and total resolution of our hostile of our hostilities in the Middle East. Based on the tenure and tone in

East. Based on the tenure and tone in these of these indepth, detailed and constructive conversations which will continue throughout the week, I have

instructed the Department of War to postpone any and all military strikes against Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure

for a 5-day period. subject to this success of the ongoing meetings and discussions. Thank you for your

discussions. Thank you for your attention to this matter, President Donald J. Trump. Do you know what Iran's

Donald J. Trump. Do you know what Iran's response is to this?

>> I've seen some immediately responded.

And you know, I would love to believe our president and our administration, but just just like we talked about at the very beginning, everything that has come out has been a bait and switch,

complete 180 lie. This is what Iran says. The Iranian Foreign Ministry

Iran says. The Iranian Foreign Ministry and state broadcaster IRIB stated in quotes, "No conversation has taken place

between Iran and the US, and Trump's claim about having these talks is false." They described it as

false." They described it as psychological warfare intended to manipulate energy prices, markets, and buy him time. And a senior Iranian

security official quoted, "Thy is not in talks with Trump and that he backed down from attacking energy infrastructure after Iran's credible

military threats and market pressure.

There has been and is not any negotiation underway." IRGC linked

negotiation underway." IRGC linked outlets and Iran's parliament speaker called reports of negotiations in quotes

Trump's own words fake news.

>> We're in a we're in a bad situation. I

mean I I pray that this this 5day somewhat truce I I I hope it lasts. The

problem is the Israelis have said they won't stop striking throughout the entire period.

>> They came out and said they don't care.

>> Right? So this this is this is the fundamental problem. The fundamental

fundamental problem. The fundamental problem is that we right now are not capable of restraining the Israelis. I

think if President Trump focuses on it, I think he has the power to restrain the Israelis. But that's the the key first

Israelis. But that's the the key first step in any formula towards peace. He's

got to restrain the Israelis before he can even get the the Iranians to the negotiating table.

>> Now, there's a lot of speculation that maybe the president made that statement to jet launch the stock market today.

Here's a post. Just minutes before Trump's announcement of talks with Iran, massive traders hit the market. In one

move, 1.5 billion in S&P 500 futures were purchased. This trade was so large,

were purchased. This trade was so large, it sent the entire index.3%

higher that exact minute. 192 million in oil futures were also sold. These orders

were four to six times larger than anything else at that time. Whoever made

those trades made $60 billion. I wonder

if that was Congress. I wonder if that was insider trading from Congress, the administration, and the Senate.

>> I I hope people look into that.

>> I hope they look into it.

>> I hope they look into it because it's it's definitely it definitely should be researched.

>> Well, a lot of people are looking into it because it's going viral on X right now and you know, it's it it The problem is good point.

>> Even if it was, you know, worst case scenario, and this would be very bad, a way to make money at the end of the day, the five days expire, we're still in the exact same spot that we're in where there's going to be a strangle hold from

the straits of horror moves. There's

going to be continued escalation. Energy

prices, even if they stabilize for this 5 days. What's going to happen when when

5 days. What's going to happen when when day five arrives? We have a problem that we have to solve. Again, look, I I I believe that President Trump can solve it. Restrain the Israelis. work with the

it. Restrain the Israelis. work with the GCC countries. That's the way to get out

GCC countries. That's the way to get out of this.

>> Well, Joe, let me give you a quick just a quick um introduction because I think a lot of people have forgotten just exactly who the you are and what you've done for this country. So Joe

Kent, former director of National Counterterrorism Center, retired Green Beret, former member of a classified special missions unit, former CIA

paramilitary officer, Gold Star spouse with 11 with 11 combat deployments, six bronze stars, author of Send Me: The

True Story of a Mother at War, a tribute to Shannon's courage and a testament to what real service looks like. trusted by

President Trump as his foreign policy adviser and leader and the leader who most recently served as head of counterterrorism for the United States of America now being

investigated by the FBI for leaking classified information. I wonder how

classified information. I wonder how many of the pedophiles that were in the Epstein files. I wonder how many of

Epstein files. I wonder how many of those pedophiles are have in uh active FBI investigations on them. Probably

zero. probably zero. As

of this recording, Poly Market says there is a 13% chance that US forces will enter Iran by March 31st and a 19%

chance of a US Iran ceasefire by March 31st. What do you think about those

31st. What do you think about those odds, man? Um, a ceasefire, I'm skeptical.

man? Um, a ceasefire, I'm skeptical.

Again, until the Israelis are restrained, there there won't be a ceasefire. boots in the ground. As you

ceasefire. boots in the ground. As you

know, when you have combat resources in theater and you've got active combat going on, saying that you can control any of these factors is is more of a wish than a plan. So, my my fear is that

we could rapidly escalate.

>> Let's talk about your res resignation and what was it? I mean,

how long have you been frustrated with what's going on?

basically since um the leadup to the first iteration of our conflict with Iran in June. Um I was I was very frustrated that we had kind of backed

ourselves into a corner artificially. I

I was and remain a big supporter of President Trump's uh overall thesis of of foreign policy of peace through strengths of stopping us from getting involved in costly wars in particular

with Iran. I think President Trump was

with Iran. I think President Trump was was uniquely postured to cut a great deal with Iran. He had in the first Trump administration, he had killed Kasam Smani, the terror mastermind. Um

once he left office, the Iranians went right back up to their old tricks. They

they funded their proxies. They were

attacking our troops in the region.

October 7th happened. Um America

generally was not respected by by the Iranians. When Trump came back into

Iranians. When Trump came back into office, the the Iranians automatically said, "Okay, wait a sec. This is a whole whole different administration. we might

be able to cut a deal with this guy, but also if we don't, he will use force like he did against Kasum Sulmani. So they

stopped their proxies from attacking us.

Last time I was on your show, we were talking about how there had been over, I think, 150, 200 attacks against our forces in Iraq and Syria. That stopped

when Trump came into office because the Iranians knew who was back. They also

knew that President Trump was willing to make a deal and actively seeking a deal.

President Trump deployed, I think, a very, very competent diplomat, Steve Witoff, to go get a deal going with the Iranians. Now, this was a major threat

Iranians. Now, this was a major threat to the Israelis because the Israelis viewed this as the prime time and Trump as the prime vehicle to use for regime change in Iraq. Now, President Trump's

stated policy had been, and he he says this all the time, that Iran can't have a nuclear bomb. Now, the Iranians actually agreed with President Trump and they had a prohibition, a Fata, a

religious decree on actually producing a nuclear weapon that had held since 2004.

And what the Iranians did say was like, "Hey, we're not going to make a nuclear bomb, but we want the ability to enrich uranium because they had seen what had taken place in Libya and Iraq." And they said, "Hey, if we go the Kaddafi route

in Libya and say, here's all of our nuclear making material, then they're a sitting duck. Then they can be invaded

sitting duck. Then they can be invaded and regime changed at any given time."

They saw the Saddam route. if they

actually pursued a weapon or even like kind of BSD that they had a weapon that same thing they they would be immediately invaded. So they kind of had

immediately invaded. So they kind of had this this ability to say hey we have a prohibition on of a nuclear weapon but we have some ability to enrich. This was

a major threat to the Israelis goal. So

what I watched the Israelis do over the course of the last year was use their their government officials engaging with our government officials but then also their surrogates in the media Mark Leen

who I'll I'll talk to tonight mainstream media think tanks foundation for defense of democracies a lot of talking heads on Fox News to move the red line. So Trump

had said my red line is no nuclear weapons. Data said great I don't want

weapons. Data said great I don't want nuclear weapons either. Let's talk. So

they move the red line by saying enrichment. Iran can have no enrichment.

enrichment. Iran can have no enrichment.

enrichment equals a nuclear weapon, which is just fundamentally not true. So

that would be parited from officials in the in the Israeli government and then also on the news.

>> I mean, let's backtrack. I don't think not one of our 18 intelligence agencies had mentioned that Iran was enriching uranium. Correct.

uranium. Correct.

>> They were doing enrichment to to to some degree. So there was enrichment

degree. So there was enrichment >> no nuclear weapons.

>> But no nuclear weapons. We knew all 18 intelligence agencies agreed that the Fatwa against actually making a nuclear weapon was holding and the Iranians were not making a nuclear weapon. So that

Tulsi Gabard testified to that last year. She just testified to it again

year. She just testified to it again this year that the Iranians under the pre previous supreme leader who was who was just killed. Now the Iranians more than likely are going to change their their strategic outlook. Uh that's my

guess. My guess is like hey a lot of

guess. My guess is like hey a lot of their hardliners are now saying hey do you see what this moderation got us and now they're going to attempt to buy one or spread. That's just my guess. But for

or spread. That's just my guess. But for

the last year, prior to this last conflict kicking off, we we did not assess that they were trying to make a nuclear nuclear weapon. So that's why they had to move the the red line and

say enrichment. And so finally through

say enrichment. And so finally through official engage engagements and the media continuing to echo this, they basically got the US talking point to change that Iran could not have any kind

of nuclear enrichment. And that was a non-starter for the Iranians. And that's

how we basically got into the 12-day war, Operation Midnight Hammer. Again,

12-day war launched by the Israelis. We

said, "Hey, we're going to come in.

We're going to do a series of limited strikes to take away any nuclear capability that Iran may have, and then we're done." Now, at the time, we had

we're done." Now, at the time, we had seen, myself and others had seen how aggressive the Iranian the I'm sorry, the Israelis were about wanting regime change inside Iran. And so when Midnight

Hammer in the leadup to it, we assessed that, hey, even if we did these strikes, the Israelis were going to come right back to us uh after a couple months and say, "No, no, now is the time for us to do regime change." And that's exactly

what happened. The difference is we had

what happened. The difference is we had robust debates uh in the leadup to Midnight Hammer. After Midnight Hammer,

Midnight Hammer. After Midnight Hammer, President Trump's uh decision-making circle was very, very tight, and that's his prerogative. He can do that.

his prerogative. He can do that.

However, he had all pro-Israel hawks like really in his ear. Lindsey Graham,

Ted Cruz, and then on the outside again the media echo chamber and knowing that President Trump was watching Fox News, knowing what media he was consuming, and they're all saying the same thing. Iran

can't have any enrichment, which basically put us on this collision course towards a conflict. I think the Israelis once again got nervous um about a month ago because they knew that Wickoff and Kushner and others in the

administration were actively engaging with the Iranians to get a deal. And

that's why the Israelis launched their attack, knowing they could force our hands. And that's why I think you saw

hands. And that's why I think you saw Marco Rubio and others come out immediately and say, "Well, yeah, there was an imminent attack." And the imminent attack was the Israelis attacking the Iranians. And then then we knew that they would retaliate back

against us.

>> Why do we why would they retaliate against us?

>> Uh why would the Iranians retaliate against us?

>> If the if they know that the Israelis are the ones that hit them, why would they retaliate against us?

>> Because they know that basically we fund the Israelis, that Israel would not have the offensive capability without us. The

Israelis are are, you know, very competent at conducting, I'd say, like smaller, more clandestine intelligence type of assassinations. Very good at doing that. They don't need our help to

doing that. They don't need our help to do that. They don't need our help

do that. They don't need our help gathering very much intelligence. But

for big military lifts that involve, you know, deploying strike packages, >> um, several thousand miles, they they need our help for that. And troops, they and also >> they want us to die for them.

>> In order for for them to commit that air power to go strike Iran, they're leaving some of their airspace vulnerable. So

they need us to back them up in that regard as well. So without us providing the defense and the offensive capability, Israel can't do it. Now Iran

in the leadup to the 12-day war, during the 12-day war and after Midnight Hammer, they observed the escalatory ladder very, very carefully. They didn't

have their proxies attack us, and they also didn't attack us until Midnight Hammer. So they let the Israelis strike

Hammer. So they let the Israelis strike them throughout the entire 12-day war, and they didn't target any of our bases in the region. And then after Midnight Hammer, they shot back an equal amount of missiles at like the empty sector of

one of the bases on on Qatar in Qatar um as we dropped bombs inside of Iran. So I

think this this la this next iteration they said, "We're not we're not going to do the escalatory ladder. If you guys come after us this time because they knew that the Israelis were going for regime change. They were going to try to

regime change. They were going to try to take out the Supreme Leader." Um and that's what led them to say, "If you guys are going to do this, then we are going to retaliate with the full force."

Because they didn't want to get pushed around again. And where did that

around again. And where did that intelligence come from? It didn't come from us.

>> The intelligence about them having >> about them enriching uranium.

>> It wasn't even it wasn't even intelligence. It was literally just

intelligence. It was literally just talking points. I mean, I may I I don't

talking points. I mean, I may I I don't even think it was portrayed as intelligence because this is what the Israelis they're very good serious.

serious.

>> The Israelis are very good at doing this. the Israelis will come and they

this. the Israelis will come and they will have engagements with our intelligence services, with our diplomats, um, and they will give information and they will say something like, "Well, this isn't an intelligence

channels yet." Because we, as you know,

channels yet." Because we, as you know, we formally share intelligence with the Israelis, but that makes its way through our own our own checks and it's not a perfect system, but it's at least a system. And they'll say, "Hey, this

system. And they'll say, "Hey, this isn't intelligence channels yet." And

then we'll go back and we'll check it to see if it's actually intelligence channels. And a lot of times it's not.

channels. And a lot of times it's not.

And that's the way this enrichment talking point was really really was really really spun because they just basically said no no America's policy has always been no enrichment. And I

went back and I looked and people can fact check me. The only American official who ever said America's policy is zero enrichment was Mike Pompeo in the first Trump administration. So the

Israelis in this Trump administration came and they were basically like here's President Trump's policy from his last administration and he he contained Iran.

This is it. This is the policy. And they

echoed it over and over and over again.

Whereas all President Trump had said was no nuclear weapon. And so to short circuit the agreement essentially that the Supreme Leader and Trump had that got them to negotiating table, the Israelis move the red line by by

basically having their surrogates their their official government interactions, but then also the media echo that. It's

a very clever, pretty sophisticated plan, but they got it done through repetition.

You got a lot of flack for something that you said on my show the last time you were here about I think I think you said that we'll roll the clip right now, but I believe you said that Iran's

>> they have attacked us over 150 times using proxies and people are calling you a flip-flopper.

>> What do you have to say to that?

>> I think if if they look at the totality of everything I've ever said, I am neither a uh an an isolationist nor am I a hawk. um on Iran. If if their proxies

a hawk. um on Iran. If if their proxies attack us, we should hammer them. I am I am uh I will debate anybody on the utility of killing Kasum Solmani.

President Trump was justified and he was correct and he was bold for killing Kasum Smani and his deputy Abommani Mahandas. He was really bold in the fact

Mahandas. He was really bold in the fact that he took them off the battlefield, but then he didn't get suckered into what we're in right now, which is a regime change war in a massive country like Iran. So, I've always been against

like Iran. So, I've always been against us doing a prolonged kinetic strikes inside of Iran. uh when Iran shot ballistic missiles at our troops, I thought we would have been justified to basically counter battery and take out

some of those ballistics. Now, right

after the Iranians shot the ballistic missiles in retaliation for Smani at our troops at Al-Assad, they accidentally shot down that Ukrainian airliner and that basically ended the conflict right

there. Um but I have never been in favor

there. Um but I have never been in favor of a regime change war inside of Iran.

If their proxies attack us, if they attack us, we hammer them back. But

again, going back to the Iranian escalatory ladder, if you look at how Iran has behaved since President Trump basically killed Smanis and then since he came back into office, they were very very deliberate about what they weren't

going what they were and what they were not going to do. They didn't hit us until we hit them. And then again, again, just for for the record, I'm not a fan of the Iranians. I'm not a fan of the goods force. Like, I've fought them.

You fought them. They've killed friends of ours. But at some point, we do have

of ours. But at some point, we do have to find a way that we can deescalate these situations and move on. The

default answer can't always be, well, we're going to do another regime change war and get sucked into this place for for 20 plus years.

>> That's my beef. I mean, the way I look at it is you got in there, you have access to a lot more information and you changed your mind. And

yeah, you're right. You know, they did they were I think they were in char they they they were the ones that developed the EFP bomb, too. Correct. That killed

a ton of our friends.

>> Yeah. But

I think we both agree we shouldn't have been in the Iraq war.

>> We shouldn't have. And then also just in terms of being being effective if our goal is to stop the Iranians from doing things like that. I argued I' I've argued this for for quite a while. We

would only strengthen the hardliners in Iran. We would only strengthen the goods

Iran. We would only strengthen the goods force, the IRGC, and the hardline Ayatollas if we go in there and try and take them out. It's the basic rally around the flag effect. And I think

we've done that. I mean the supreme leader Ali Kami that we killed not a great guy probably a bad guy but by killing him we basically said the next guy who's in charge he's going to say

we're not going to have a prohibition on developing nuclear weapons and if we end up killing him too and we end up killing some of the other uh folks that are more moderate they're not going to be replaced by like a a mini Thomas Jefferson they're going to be replaced

by more and more hardliners. There's

always been a tension in Iran between the clerics and between the IRGC. And

the IRGC, it's full of pipe hitters, man. I mean, it's the guys it's the guys

man. I mean, it's the guys it's the guys who fought the Iraq war. They fought us in Iraq. They fought against the

in Iraq. They fought against the Israelis in uh in Lebanon with Hezbollah. So, if we give these guys the

Hezbollah. So, if we give these guys the ability to basically say, "Hey, don't listen to the moderates. Our job is to fight the Americans. It's to fight the Israelis." Then it's this is going to

Israelis." Then it's this is going to get harder and harder. There's going to be more terrorism. There's going to be more blood. And then basically the only

more blood. And then basically the only recipe for for getting out of this is going to be more and more continued war.

Problem is though, you've got the Straits of Hormuz as a choke point for major world enemy energy. So this is going to become it already has become a major geostrategic issue and a major

issue on the world economy.

>> That's like 20 to 25% of the world's oil comes out of there. Everybody's pissed

at us.

>> Exactly. you know, back to the back to the Iranian proxies and them killing US service members in in Iraq and in Afghanistan as well. That's not why

we're there, though, you know, and so I see everybody in there. They're they're

they're talking about the hostages, you know, back in the day. They're talking

about how they and they're clipping you on my show, but that's not why we're there. You know, you can you can scrge

there. You know, you can you can scrge around and find all kinds of justifications on why we would be starting a war with Iran, but none of that relevant stuff is the reason that

we're there. And it hasn't been stated

we're there. And it hasn't been stated either by anybody but just internet trolls. If we wanted to clean

internet trolls. If we wanted to clean the deck on Iranian proxies that were outside of Iran or even inside of Iran, fine. Do it. Do limited strikes. That's

fine. Do it. Do limited strikes. That's

fine. Uh the Israelis are very confident. I mean, they've killed many

confident. I mean, they've killed many Hamas they've killed at least one Hamas leader inside of Tran. Um, they've

killed how many members of Hezbollah, decapitated them with the the pagers.

Um, operations like that are pragmatic.

They make sense. They're limited in their scope and they they target exactly where we we need to target. Again, back

to the the policy of the first Trump administration, President Trump would use force where required. But then, like no other president I've seen, he would apply other leverage that only America has in terms of economic power and in

terms of diplomacy. So, after he kills Somani and Muhamad, he goes and he and he slaps maximum pressure pressure sanctions on Iran. That makes the the economic life in Iran very very challenging. That results in waves and

challenging. That results in waves and waves of protest that we were seeing.

Back in January, just not that long ago, we saw Iranians out on the streets protesting against the current regime because of the cost of living. Now, the

Iranian the regime knows that their own people could overthrow them if they're not happy, especially, you know, with with just how expensive it is and challenging it is to live. Um, that

organic protest movement was already happening, but it was happening in large part because of the economic pressure that President Trump had put on them.

Now, if you want to ruin all that, you go as an outsider with the Israelis and you strike them because then everyone is going to rally around the flag. That's

why we're not seeing any protest. That's

why even the Kurds have said, "Hey, we don't want to be part of any kind of regime change right now."

>> I've heard rumors that the that that we wanted the Kurds to back us in this.

>> My answer to that is why the would the Kurds back us in this? We abandoned

them in Iraq. They got

slaughtered when we did that.

>> We just abandoned them about a month ago in Syria. I got buddies over at Fifth

in Syria. I got buddies over at Fifth Group that were complaining about it and >> and they they I mean they fought with them.

>> Yeah.

>> And we abandoned them again and now they're getting slaughtered in Syria. And then we ask them

Syria. And then we ask them the US has a I mean we have a pattern and that's what the pattern is. We come

in, we pretend like you're we're your friend. we get what we need and then we

friend. we get what we need and then we abandon you and they slaughter your ass and we do nothing. Happened in

Afghanistan, happened to the Kurds twice in my in in in Iraq and in Syria.

>> Yeah.

>> One just a couple of months ago. The

Syrian one just a couple of months ago.

Now we're already back asking them. Like

of course they're going to say you.

you.

>> Yeah. I think that was I think that was the Israelis trying to like basically use a media campaign to will that into existence. I don't know if that was ever

existence. I don't know if that was ever a very real thing. Um, but but again, if our goal is to get rid of the the Ayatollah is to get rid of that that government, the last thing that we should have ever done was strike them

because now I mean, Persians have their pride. I mean, I it's not that hard to

pride. I mean, I it's not that hard to imag most people probably watching this this show or or me or you, we didn't like Joe Biden, but if a foreigner would have attacked America, hey man, like I'm going to saddle up and I'm going to

defend my country. Yeah.

>> I I don't think they're that much different than we are. And we're seeing that right now. there there's a massive rally around the the flag uh factor happening inside of Iran. And again,

we're only going to get more and more hardliners. Now,

hardliners. Now, >> let's talk about the strategy.

>> Yeah.

>> What is the strategy? What are we doing?

>> Well, right. Right now, this is >> is there a strategy?

>> Well, the problem is we have a drastically different strategic goal than the Israelis do. So, we will say that Israel is our ally in this. They're

basically our co-equal in this. People

like me will say, "Actually, we're not really even co-equals. They're leading

because we're having to react to them."

But either way, we're basically joined at the hip with the Israelis. Now, the

problem is they have a much different strategic goal and a much, I'd say, higher threshold and tolerance for for chaos and bloodshed than we do. Now, we

have stated that our strategic goal, you'll hear Secretary Hath rattle these off his morning briefings that he gives to the media. It's to destroy the the Iranian Navy, to destroy the IRGC, to destroy their ballistic missile

capability, to destroy all their enrichment. So, we we kind of have a

enrichment. So, we we kind of have a checklist of like things that we want to bomb essentially to take off the battlefield. That's about as far as

battlefield. That's about as far as we've gone with stating what our strategic goal is, which I think is a big problem that we have with the GWAT is we never really said what our strategic goal was. Obviously, there was

get bin Laden and make sure the homeland isn't attacked, but I just remember being in Iraq being like, what is the what's the goal here? Like, we're

building a government. So, same thing.

We didn't really learn that lesson. We

haven't stated our strategic goal. The

Israelis, as critical as I am of our relationship with the Israelis, the Israelis have a very clear strategic goal, and that is to take out this regime, lock, stock, and barrel. That's

to get rid of the Ayatollas, the clerical class that rules over, and then also the IRGC, which is a huge lift.

It's a big country. Those institutions

are massive. They've got a lot of support, but that's the Israelis goal.

Now, the Israelis don't really care necessarily if that happens and Iran then slips into chaos and the Straits of Hormuz remains inflamed and there's a migration crisis and there's an ongoing

war. The Israelis don't care about that.

war. The Israelis don't care about that.

They care the RGC and the Ayatollas can no longer fund their proxies or cause them problems inside of Israel. So

again, you you've got us footing the bill, doing the majority of the combat, doing the dying, doing the fighting. We

have a very very murky strategic objective. Whereas the Israelis are

objective. Whereas the Israelis are driving this. They're driving

driving this. They're driving essentially our commitment of combat power. They're driving us having people

power. They're driving us having people lose their lives. They have a very clear strategic objective. And this is why I

strategic objective. And this is why I say the number one thing we have to do in order to get out of this is to restrain the Israelis and get our relationship with Israel straight.

Otherwise, it's all going to be for not and we're going to continue to get sucked in further and further. I mean,

if we're attached hip to hip with them, I mean, it's got to be the same goal, right?

>> You would think, but it's not.

>> Is it just not articulated, or is it really not?

>> I feel like it's it's it's truly not.

And and the Israelis don't have a have a hard time articulating what their goal is.

>> Oh, I mean, us articulating.

>> Yeah. So, we we just list off the tactical punch list of things we want to bomb to take out so the Iranians don't have anymore. Um, and to me that's not a

have anymore. Um, and to me that's not a real strategic goal.

>> You know, you had a I want to bring out this up. You had a really good article

this up. You had a really good article in the Washington Post. I think it released today, but you were talking about some strategy here. And that made me think uh the potential deployment of

US ground troops makes me very nervous.

>> Yeah.

>> Citing recent reporting that the president is considering seizing Car Island, Iran's main hub for oil experts.

This is you quoted. I just think that would be a disaster, Kent said of deploying US troops there. It would

essentially be giving Iran a bunch of hostages on an island that they could barrage with drones and missiles.

Are you the only person up there that's that's thinking straight? Because

that's exactly what would happen. You're

putting US service members in a in a fishbowl for Iran to kill because they're they are they're stranded on a island.

>> Yeah. I mean,

>> this is our this is our strategy.

>> Yeah.

>> Who came up with this strategy?

>> It sounds like Trump.

>> It sounds like Lindsey Graham. I mean,

Lindsey Graham was on the Sunday shows yesterday talking about how great it would be. It would be just like you. I

would be. It would be just like you. I

mean, just insanity. And I mean I don't I don't think the people who are pragmatic and are are expressing their concerns. I don't believe they're being

concerns. I don't believe they're being listened to. Uh now obviously the the

listened to. Uh now obviously the the administration will push back and say no no no we're doing robust planning and we're hearing all voices etc. But when I see ideas like that floated and there's

much worse ones out there as well. Um

basically most the formulas for putting boots in the ground inside of Iran are I I problematic. I I guess it's too late

I problematic. I I guess it's too late of a way to put it. um they're bad plans.

>> They've already stated they want us to do it. They're ready for it

do it. They're ready for it >> 100%. I mean, that would be handing Iran

>> 100%. I mean, that would be handing Iran basically a strategic victory. Um

because once they get our troops on the ground there, they're going to be able to kill some of them. We're we're going to take losses. And then we we fall back into that cycle. Once we take losses somewhere, we say, "Oh, no, no, now we

can't leave. We have to stay to avenge

can't leave. We have to stay to avenge our fallen. It can't be all for nothing.

our fallen. It can't be all for nothing.

We have to stay. We have to keep fighting." We saw this over and over

fighting." We saw this over and over again in the GWAT. Every single time we talked about any kind of withdrawal in in Iraq or Afghanistan, it was the same argument. We've lost too much here.

argument. We've lost too much here.

There's still more that we could do. So,

I mean, in terms of that the the Croc Island, that makes me nervous because I have heard so many people like Lindsey Graham and others that are not military people that are not in the Pentagon, that are not reading intelligence every

day talk about it very flippantly, like, "Oh, we'll just take that island. We'll

just take their oil." I don't want to tell you guys like it's not 2003 anymore. You can't just put guys there

anymore. You can't just put guys there and they'll occupy it. Like there's

ballistics, there's drones. They would

be sitting ducks in that area. And as a matter of fact, like like you said, the Iranians would probably be like, "Please take the island. We, you know, we'll roll out the red carpet for you guys."

>> I mean, do I need to read your bio again? Why is he taking advice from

again? Why is he taking advice from Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz and whoever else that's just career bureaucrats?

>> This is the problem. I I

>> And then you got a guy like you in there >> with tons of experience in war in intelligence.

>> Yeah. And there there's others, too.

There's there's plenty of us in there that can give him much better advice. I

just hope the president reflects and he's I know he's mad at me. I hope he reflects and I I hope he looks at the adviserss he has around him currently that got him to the state that we're in right now because we're not in a good

state. He knows that and he needs to

state. He knows that and he needs to start listening to people that are going to give him better advice that can give us a clear pathway out of this.

>> Who are some people that would give him better advice >> other than yourself?

>> Vice President, DNI Gabbard and their teams, I I think are absolutely key.

>> The vice president and the DNI >> and and the DNI. Yeah. Yep. And there's

there's there's good people at the Pentagon that can give you options.

>> So, he's not taking advice from his own vice president.

>> I that I don't know. I wasn't at the vice president's level. Uh I think they have a good relationship. I just based on what I've seen and based on what we've seen in the in in the public sphere, he has been taking more advice

obviously from from Lindsey Graham, from Ted Cruz, from Mark Leven on TV, um, than he than he has been from from people who may say, "Hey, >> Mark Levin on TV, that's who he's getting advice from."

>> in terms of how easy and great of an idea this will be. I mean, so the media e ecosystem, they're not giving him tactical military advice, but they were, I believe, in my opinion a big part of echoing the Israeli talking points about

no enrichment. you have to strike now.

no enrichment. you have to strike now.

If you strike now, you'll be a hero.

There was also this false narrative basically that said like, hey, because the people were on the streets in January, if you take a couple strikes right now and you really hammer them, the rest is going to be easy. It's going

to be a cakewalk. The people are going to rise up. They're going to overthrow the regime. They're going to love you.

the regime. They're going to love you.

They're going to cut a deal. It's going

to be quick and easy like Venezuela was.

I think Venezuela did a lot to give us some false confidence in in how quick and easy a regime change, regime modification, whatever you want to call

it, can be. Um, so people like Levin, people on, you know, Fox, uh, New York Post, New York Times, etc., a lot of those talking heads, you know, coincidentally, not so coincidentally, a

lot of them were the same people who talked us into the Iraq war convinced him how quick and easy this would be.

But, I mean, to your point, I think if he if he took some more advice from Vice President, from from DNI Gabbard and their and their teams, I I think we'd be in a much better spot and I think we'd be able to carve our way out of this

mess, >> man. Wow. How many troops do we have

>> man. Wow. How many troops do we have over there right now waiting? Is it 25?

>> Honestly, Marines, I don't know. I mean,

I see what you see on the news. I'm I'm

disconnected from all that.

>> How many is Israel sent?

>> Far less than us. They they most their military operations are taking place in Lebanon. They're they're doing a lot of

Lebanon. They're they're doing a lot of air air support and power projection uh via air, which is heavily funded by us.

>> Are they talking about sending ground force?

>> If they could, it'd be tiny. They just

don't have I mean, >> so we'll do it. Oh, we would have to do it now 100%. I mean, they might >> do it for them.

>> They could do a commando raid or something, you know, that'd be about it.

But in terms of any kind of meaningful hold ground, even for a limited amount of time, that would have to be American Boots.

>> Oh, okay. That's kind of what I thought.

But, you know, >> I'm getting angry, Joe.

>> I can I can tell. I hear angry.

But um Oh man.

It just no new wars. No new wars. It just echoes in my head all day long. Yeah.

day long. Yeah.

>> And here we are.

>> Here we are right back at war.

>> Completely avoidable. Completely

avoidable. And I And I pray again he listens to some of the the voices that that can get him out of this. I think

there's still time, but this is this is very bad and this could this could get worse. And I think platforms like yours

worse. And I think platforms like yours are important because people like you, big podcasts, I think you guys brought a lot of people out to vote for President Trump. Um, and I think it's really

Trump. Um, and I think it's really important that all the people that are watching this this show and all the other podcasts call their senators, call their representatives, make their voice

heard because there there is again that media ecosystem that kind of exists oddly in the in in the White House.

We've got to penetrate through that.

They were listening during the campaign and I think they'll listen again if people take this as a call to action.

>> I mean, so we're talking about war strategy a little bit here. What what is the what is what is the rest of the world's pulse on this? Is anybody other

than Israel encouraging us to hit Iran?

>> I doubt it. I I I strongly doubt it. Um

I mean China gets like not that China's our friend. China's not our friend. They

our friend. China's not our friend. They

get like 75% of their oil from the straighter Hermuz.

>> They're still getting it. The only

difference is they're selling the transactions in in yuan. And so I think China may like this because obviously we've taken our eyes off the Pacific for people who care about Taiwan. Um the

Pacific is truly our border. We're a

Pacific power. I think a lot of that has kind of gone by the wayside because we had to move so much combat power into into SinCom. So I'm sure China's happy

into SinCom. So I'm sure China's happy with it. Russia, too. We've taken our

with it. Russia, too. We've taken our eyes off of getting a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine because there is uh scarcity now. We've created

scarcity while it's taking place in the straits of Hermus with the energy sector. Russian oil, Russian gas, all

sector. Russian oil, Russian gas, all that is going to be worth more on the market now to kind to fund their war.

So, I think our major competitors, Russia and China, I would say they're they're probably pretty happy about this. But all of our regional allies, I

this. But all of our regional allies, I think, are are probably pretty furious about it. And China's uh becoming more

about it. And China's uh becoming more aggressive towards Taiwan since we started this.

>> Right. Right. And then two in terms of like >> now that's a real threat.

>> That's a real threat. And then

>> they take those chip plants. That's a

real threat. They will win the AI race like that.

>> It is. And yeah, and and it was always debatable.

>> We're going after fake nuclear weapons.

>> It was always debatable if we could defend it before, but now with all the combat power pushed into Sentcom, that's a huge issue. Another major issue is the the strength of the dollar. The dollar's

already been weakened so much because of our deficit spending. We can deficit spend because we're the world's reserve currency holder and a lot of that strength comes from the petro dollar that any money that gets bought from the GCC or any oil that gets bought from the

GCC, you got to settle the transaction in in dollars. China's already kind of short >> and then they reinvested in our stock market.

>> Right. Right. But but so if you want to keep that system going, which I'm not sure if it's the best system, but we should at least deliberately move away from it if we're going to do it. It

shouldn't disappear over the course of a month because of a war, because the straits being choked off. Iran knows

this. They know that if they if they choke off the straits and they only let, you know, Chinese ships, etc. come through and they settle the transaction in another currency that they're eroding away at the petro dollar. And we also

need the GCC to be on board. All the the Gulf cooperation countries in in the region, they've got to be on board with the petro dollar, too. The reason why they went with the petro dollar is because we provided their security guarantees. Well, how are the security

guarantees. Well, how are the security guarantees now? We can't defend them

guarantees now? We can't defend them against what's what's taking place. We

can't defend them from Iranian ballistics, Iranian drones. They know

full well that the the war was launched by Israel and now they're suffering the consequence. So, we're all of a sudden

consequence. So, we're all of a sudden we're not the best ally. So, how long do we expect them to continue to settle their transactions in the dollar? So,

the ramifications of this conflict I I think are are massive.

>> What about Europe? I mean, when the facility in Qatar got hit, I mean, they're now having to renegotiate all their contracts with China, Italy, there

was there was a handful of European countries that did get the majority of their oil from there. Now, they have to renegotiate because they're going to default on the contract.

>> Yeah, there's only one country that gains in this and that's Israel. I mean,

that that's just the bottom line.

>> Is there anything that we gain? Do we

gain anything at all by doing this?

>> I don't believe so. I mean, my my critics would say, "No, we're finally once and for all taking out the Iranian regime." Um, again, for all the reasons

regime." Um, again, for all the reasons I previously outlined, I just disagree with that. And again, we don't seem to

with that. And again, we don't seem to have a strategy that's working in that direction, minus the punch list of things that we're bombing.

>> Well, Joe, I want to take a break here real quick, but before we do, I I saw Trump's speech this morning about you, too. He's poking fun that you lost that

too. He's poking fun that you lost that you lost your congressional run. So, I

pulled some stats.

So, I'm poking fun at you this morning about losing in Washington, losing your Congress race. Trump actually lost there

Congress race. Trump actually lost there in the last presidential election by set by a 17% margin himself. You only lost

by a 3.8% margin. Who's the

loser? All right, let's take a break.

Aging is inevitable. And if you're anything like me, you feel it a little more every year. Sore knees, tight joints. Recovery takes longer than it

joints. Recovery takes longer than it used to. We can't stop the clock, but we

used to. We can't stop the clock, but we can take care of ourselves. That's why I take Bub's Naturals collagen peptides. I

mix it into my tea every morning. It

blends right in. No taste, no gritty texture. It's simple. I've been using

texture. It's simple. I've been using Bub's collagen for a long time, and I genuinely notice the difference. My

knees feel better. My skin looks better.

I recover faster after workouts. I stick

with Bubs because I trust the company.

Their collagen is NSF certified for sport and sourced from grass-fed cattle.

So, it's clean, tested, and exactly what they say it is. And there's a bigger mission here. Bubs was founded in honor

mission here. Bubs was founded in honor of Navy Seal Glenn Bub Dhy. And 10% of all profits go towards helping veterans transition back to civilian life. So,

you're not just supporting your joints and recovery, you're supporting people who served this country. If you're ready to upgrade your daily routine with Bubs Naturals Collagen, head to

bubsnaturals.com/srs

bubsnaturals.com/srs and use code shaun for 20% off your order. Again, that's

order. Again, that's bubsnaturals.com/srs

bubsnaturals.com/srs and use code sha for 20% off your order.

Take care of your body. It's the only one you've got.

Hi, I'm Sarah Adams, the host of Vigilance Elites, The Watch Floor, where we highlight what matters. It became a permissive state, explain to you why it

matters, and then aim to leave you feeling better informed than you were before you hit play. Terrace, hostile

intelligence agencies, organized crime. Not everything is

organized crime. Not everything is urgent, but this show will focus on what is need to know, not just what is nice to know.

All right, Joe, I know we were going to move on about strategy from the uh Epstein war. I mean, I mean the Iran

Epstein war. I mean, I mean the Iran war, but uh I got a couple more questions for you. So, one, what is Rubio doing in all this?

I I'm not sure. I mean, I I think he's doing the best he can to give the president options. I mean, he came out

president options. I mean, he came out right away and I think was pretty honest when he said we had to attack otherwise he was realized we're going to >> What are the other options that he's given? Are you aware of those?

given? Are you aware of those?

>> I'm not. No, I don't know.

>> Is he for this?

>> That I don't know honestly. Yeah.

>> What you know there's a lot of strategy.

There's a lot of of stuff floating around about strategy, attacking their infrastructure, taking away the fertilizer for their food, creating famines, hitting their water supply,

starving them of water. I mean, hitting their energy grid. Is there any validity to that?

>> I'm sure it was looked at because we look at everything, but that that I don't know. The only

don't know. The only >> those are innocent people.

>> The only strategy I've seen is the punch list of military targets. Um, and I don't I don't I still believe the US military would not deliberately target um civilian infrastructure in that way.

>> You don't think we would do that?

>> I don't think we would. I I I just based on my experience in the military. I

don't think that we would. Now, will the Israelis? This is the problem. This is

Israelis? This is the problem. This is

the problem that we have being partnered with someone who has different values than we do. Um, look, the Israelis believe this is existential. the

Israelis, we've seen what the Israelis what they did in Gaza. Like they they have a different >> 20,000 kids.

>> They have a whole different way of fighting wars than we do. They they

fight total war. They fight uh very very biblical wars. Um we do not like

biblical wars. Um we do not like >> I mean in all honesty they fight a war how you should fight a war.

>> Precisely. So

>> if you want to win >> like we that's not want to win. That's

not in our interest because at the end of the day like if you're going to do that then you're going to occupy the land. You're going to fully take the

land. You're going to fully take the land. We're not going to do that. We

land. We're not going to do that. We

we've never been a very good occupying army. America has not been a good

army. America has not been a good occupying army. I don't think Americans

occupying army. I don't think Americans have the colonial mentality. I don't

think we have the total war mentality.

I'm glad that we don't. However, if

we're going to be again it goes back to are we going to be partnered with the Israelis and attempt to pretend that we can have a different strategic goal but then also a different appetite for how war is conducted. Like at some point we

should just say there's certain things we can partner with the Israelis on like limited strike counterterrorism operations absolutely but when it comes to fighting and to try and take over and

quell and dominate an entire population we cannot be joined at the hip with the Israelis just due to the different strategic goals but then also just a different value system.

>> Is there any way at all to differentiate that to to to have our goal and their goal and be in this together?

>> It seems one and the same to me. I don't

believe so, but we're paying for the Israelis. We're paying for everything

Israelis. We're paying for everything that they're doing. Um, and so we are the dominant one in this relationship.

We need to assert ourselves as such. I

honestly, and I know I've gotten a lot of crap and people have said, "Oh, you're anti-Semitic, whatever." I've got no issue with the Israelis. They're

pursuing their objectives. I have an issue with our reaction to the Israelis.

Like, our government should not be our action should not be directed by a foreign government. That's my biggest

foreign government. That's my biggest issue.

>> You have an Yeah. You have you're upset because we are under their influence.

>> Yes. Exactly.

>> And you know in your resignation letter you had talked about how the Iraq war >> Yeah.

>> Syria >> Yep.

>> that was because we were under their influence too. And I want to ask you how

influence too. And I want to ask you how were we under their influence in Syria.

>> So So I think the war in Syria wouldn't have happened if the Iraq war wouldn't have happened. So the Iraq war was

have happened. So the Iraq war was driven obviously um by the the neoonservative movement here in America, military-industrial complex, but a big part of that was also the Israeli lobby.

Benjamin Netanyahu at the time who had just gotten done being the Israeli prime minister, I think he was still in government, he was like the finance minister, he came and he aggressively lobbied and testified in in the House and in the Senate that Saddam was

developing weapons of mass destruction.

So he helped launder that narrative that Saddam was developing weapons of mass destruction in conjunction with the military-industrial complex, the neoonservatives to say that we had to go in and we had to take away the the

nuclear weapons. Um, you also had others

nuclear weapons. Um, you also had others in like the think tank realm, the same thing, the media echo chamber who was saying that Saddam was linked to al-Qaeda and to 9/11 potentially. They

so they laundered those talking points as well. Now, Benjamin Netanyahu and the

as well. Now, Benjamin Netanyahu and the Lakood party really wanted us to go in and take out Saddam so that they could have basically a launching pad for operations into Iraq and then also into

Syria. They wanted us to do the heavy

Syria. They wanted us to do the heavy lifting so that they could eventually get their goal of taking out Assad, who was supporting Hezbollah and Hamas, uh, and then also taking out Iran. So,

that's why they supported the the war in Iraq. The prime minister at the time,

Iraq. The prime minister at the time, Ariel Chiron, initially said, "No, I don't support this. I want America to focus on taking out Iran first, but then eventually he got on board. So, you

basically had both major political parties inside of uh Israel pushing for the war in Iraq. The uh Israelis also wanted access to Iraq's oil supply so

that they could get a pipeline of oil coming out of Iraq and directly into uh Israel circumventing Syria because they didn't want to go through Syria because

Assad was supporting the Iranians and supporting Hamas and Hezbollah. So once

we got into Iraq and got into that quagmire, we the US government screwed things up so badly that we basically handed over Iraq as you know to Iranianbacked Shi that were there. Um so

by the time we were done in Iraq, Iran pretty much controlled Iraq through their through their proxies, helped them circumvent sanctions, made Iran even stronger. So then you had the Shia

stronger. So then you had the Shia crescent. You basically had a

crescent. You basically had a unification of uh Tran, Baghdad, and Damascus forming that crescent, that land bridge, Iranian supplies going right into Israel's backyard. So the

Israelis at the end of the Iraq war were like, "No, no, this is not going to work at all. We we have to break this up. We

at all. We we have to break this up. We

have to go to war in Syria. We have to take down Assad." Arab Spring happened.

There was some energy uh from the people. I think was somewhat organic,

people. I think was somewhat organic, but then in short order, we came in and we said, "We're we're going to work with the Israelis, but we're also going to have to work heavily with the Sunni

population on the ground in uh in Syria to create an uprising." And that's where ISIS came from. We worked directly with al-Qaeda. Hillary Clinton's emails

al-Qaeda. Hillary Clinton's emails confirm this. Um the operations that we

confirm this. Um the operations that we were doing to support the so-called Free Syrian army, and there were some moderates there, but the most effective guys initially were al-Qaeda and then eventually ISIS. Now obviously ISIS got

eventually ISIS. Now obviously ISIS got out of control and they started plotting attacks in Europe. They started plotting attacks in America. They took over large swaths of Iraq. So we then had to go back and put out once again the brush

fire that we had started and go after ISIS. And that's where I lost my lay

ISIS. And that's where I lost my lay wife. But Israel was the driving factor

wife. But Israel was the driving factor in that. We took down Saddam, who was

in that. We took down Saddam, who was the strong man against Israel. We then

had to go in and take out Assad, who was a strong man against Israel as well. And

now this is the third phase. We're going

now into Iran to take out that strong government for Israel. And and we who did we put in charge of Syria?

>> Well, we we handed that whole Well, again, we screwed the whole thing up so much that >> we handed it to a leader of al-Qaeda.

>> Yep. He was in ISIS initially. He was in al-Qaeda initially in Iraq fighting fighting against us. We had him in jail, joined ISIS, broke off from ISIS, hand selected by Bin Laden's right-hand man,

Ian Zawihiri, to lead Nusra. And then

they rebranded. And this is the like the number one way to to fool Americans as a jihadist is just put on a suit and get a good PR company. And then apparently we'll just believe whatever you say.

>> There's videos of this guy holding people's heads that he cut off.

>> Yeah. He's I mean he he's the thut President Trump's hand.

>> Yeah. Horrible advice. Yep. And so

>> what the are we doing?

>> Exactly.

>> What are we doing?

>> Exactly. President Trump at the beginning again, this is where Trump >> This guy's inviting a terrorist.

>> Yeah.

>> Into our house.

>> The in the first Trump administration, he had Syria, right? He said, "We're going to go in. We're going to take out the caliphate because it poses a threat to us and then we're going to get out."

And this is why I supported President Trump even after losing Shannon because he was trying to get our troops out. The

military was fighting him. Um and then when uh Assad fell in December, right before President Trump even even took office, when Assad fell and Galani,

whatever HTS took over Syria, President Trump put out a truth. You can still probably pull it up where he says, "Whatever happens in Syria, it's not our business. I always said it was a bad

business. I always said it was a bad idea. I don't want to be involved in

idea. I don't want to be involved in Syria." And that was actually the right

Syria." And that was actually the right approach because it was too late for us to go back in and you know fight the new government etc. Best thing that we could have done is back off, let the Turks, let the Israelis, let our regional

partners kind of take lead there. But

instead we we went all in with the shara government and we we embraced them and and now we're pretending they're part of like the de ISIS coalition and it's just it's an entire mess. Like look, the Middle East basically and President

again, President Trump used to understand this. The Middle East is a

understand this. The Middle East is a place where you can just get involved in these neverending quagmires and you start one fire to put out another and you never fully extricate yourself. And

at the end of the equation, there's never a clear benefit for the American people. And that's that's that's gotten

people. And that's that's that's gotten us to a state this state that we're in right now. And we have to stop that.

right now. And we have to stop that.

What about the IAEA inspections?

We were going in there and inspecting all these facilities in Iran, correct?

And then Trump cut that. Oh yeah, as part of the >> in his first administration, >> right, as part of the getting rid of the JCPOA, >> why would we do that?

>> I think the idea with the JCPOA was it gave Iran access and and I partially agree with this. It gave Iran access to more capital with sanctions circumvention. That was the whole famous

circumvention. That was the whole famous initially Obama unfroze a bunch of the assets that we had we had frozen and that's why we flew over the pallets of cash that that everyone talks about so frequently. And then as part of throwing

frequently. And then as part of throwing out the JCPOA, we got rid of the inspections and we did and and there was um because when they got when they put in the inspectors, there was some sanctions relief that came there. Uh by

getting rid of the JCPOA and slapping the sanctions back on them, that made it more challenging for the the inspectors to to get back into the Iranian sites.

Again though, like Trump had used his leverage. He killed Solmani. We were in

leverage. He killed Solmani. We were in a really good place at the beginning of this administration. President Trump was

this administration. President Trump was in a great spot with Iran. him and the supreme leader both agreed no nukes. We

need to have a discussion about enrichment. We need to have a discussion

enrichment. We need to have a discussion about su about how that's going to be supervised and checked. But this was a discussion that could have been worked out by diplomats sitting at a table as

opposed to a massive military conf uh conflict. And and Iran and again I'm no

conflict. And and Iran and again I'm no fan of the of Iran. They were

restraining their proxies. They even

restrained their proxies throughout the first iteration of the 12-day war. So

again, I I go back to why are we doing what we're doing right now? Look at the ramifications. Look at how little we're

ramifications. Look at how little we're gaining from this. And again, all all roads go back to Israel is the benefactor in all of this. And we we've got to get that relationship to a place where it actually benefits us and not

just them.

>> As far as these proxies, I mean, you know, Sarah Adams, correct? I mean,

she's been talking about the sleeper cells >> in the US for probably 2 years now, maybe longer.

>> Yeah.

>> You know, says there's thousands >> Yeah.

>> thousands of terrorists in sleeper cells all around the country. Now,

>> how are we going to know if Iran is the one that activated them, >> right? Or or were they just inspired by

>> right? Or or were they just inspired by events that are over there? So, I I I testified publicly um in December that we at NCTC had had identified 18,000 uh

known suspected terrorists who had access to America. The more we dug into the data uh of the last four years, the more I realized we have no idea who's in our country. um just because there was

our country. um just because there was no border, the CBP1 app and the ability for people to come into the country undetected but then later apply for a benefit knowing they'd get a parole status which gives them illegal status

in America which we're still caught up in the courts and fighting the courts with. Um we we just simply don't know.

with. Um we we just simply don't know.

At the beginning of this war, we were looking at other data sets of people who could have come from either Iran or Lebanon, Iraq, countries that have large Shia populations. And again, the data

Shia populations. And again, the data was it to me it was as uh it was as murky as the numbers of who came into the border. Like it just it it the one

the border. Like it just it it the one consistent factor I kept coming away with or the one one takeaway I kept coming away with was that we have no idea who is in our country right now.

And that is incredibly dangerous. So

again, I think we should be focusing the majority of our efforts on securing our our homeland and making sure the people who came into our country in the last four years are located and we get them

out. Now, sleeper cells, I think a lot

out. Now, sleeper cells, I think a lot of people when they hear sleeper cells, they'll think like it's a handful of guys who are specifically trained and infiltrated to conduct an attack at a certain time. There could that that

certain time. There could that that could be taking place. I don't think that that's the main threat. I think the main threat is people that have come here legally and illegally being

inspired by media they consume or by seeing social media clips and then saying, "Now I'm going to conduct an attack as a lone actor." Because that's even harder for us to pick up on. like

cells when they infiltrate, they have to communicate with each other. The US

intelligence community and law enforcement were pretty good at infiltrating those cells and and detecting them. It's not 100%. It could

detecting them. It's not 100%. It could

still happen, but when it's a lone actor and it's someone who's just inspired to take action based on the fact that they shouldn't even be in our country in the first place and they see some media um

and they take action, then that's hard for us to actually get ahead of and stop until it's too late. And at the beginning of the con this conflict, we've already seen several attacks.

There was a guy down in Texas who went in the bar and and shot up >> uh several I think killed three people, shot several more. You know, he had an Iran t-shirt on.

>> Um ODU too, Old Dominion University, Virginia.

>> Exactly. Right there, too. Uh, and then >> how do you know that they so it's how do you know they're they're they need to communicate and that we would pick that up because it's been

reported by Sarah and her counterparts that they are only communicating back to HQ and Afghanistan through criers and that they have they're totally isolated

that they don't know each other. So the

only way they have to communicate is through cers which we would not pick that up.

>> That's definitely possible too. Yeah,

that's that's certainly possible. Yeah.

Yeah, I wouldn't rule it out. Again, it

goes back to like the border was open for four years. So, it's kind of like if you and I wanted to attack our adversaries and they left their border open for four years, like how creative could we get? And that's the opportunity that we gave all of our enemies. So,

when people would say, well, well, how many bad guys do you think are in the country? They're like like seriously,

country? They're like like seriously, what's the number? I'm like, I I I don't know. I'll tell you the truth. I'll tell

know. I'll tell you the truth. I'll tell

you the truth is that the more we dig through the data, the more we realize we really truly don't know. And then people would say, well, do you think it's sleeper cells? Do you think it's this,

sleeper cells? Do you think it's this, that, or the other thing? And it's like, well, honestly, again, we got we kind of go back to the only thing we created for the last four years under the previous administration was a massive opportunity

for terrorists to exploit our country and and and to kill people here.

>> If they were to attack with a proxy, would you be 100% confident that it was them?

um if if Iran or I mean at this point what we've seen more of is we've seen younger people some of whom uh were born here conduct these attacks and they were just inspired by something that that

they saw and then a lot of them too I I I know Sarah has her theory of the case I think the bigger threat based on what we we saw last year we we saw uh the terrorist attacks we saw here in America

most of those people were inspired by by media content they had consumed coming out of Gaza the Gaza conflict IT and they cited the Gaza as being a driver uh pushing them towards violence. So yeah,

obviously if we intercepted a cell um of Iranians that you know um we could prove they had ties back to Iran, then yeah, then absolutely we'd have to hold them

accountable for that.

I mean, there are other motivations for this as well to get us all riled up.

>> Oh, for sure. 100%.

>> Do you think that's a possibility?

>> I think it's I think the I think war always presents an opportunity for people to exploit to further their objectives. So if you if you want to

objectives. So if you if you want to sell more of surveillance state, more infringements upon our civil civil liberties, now is the time to do it because like I just described, it's a very scary in security environment. You

can you can legitimately say like, hey, we don't know who's in our borders.

Terrorists could attack because what's taking place in the Middle East? Uh

there's been a massive decline in law and order in general in our cities. So

therefore, we need take your pick. What

what kind of intrusions on our civil liberties? it it becomes easier to I

liberties? it it becomes easier to I mean the more people are scared of what what's happening >> the easier that is to sell. So I

definitely think there's going to be elements of the government big tech that will exploit this this chaos.

>> You're being accused of leaking classified information.

>> Yeah.

>> What classified information did you leak?

>> It's a good question. I didn't leak any I didn't leak any classified information. I had my I had my full

information. I had my I had my full security clearance until last week when I walked out the door. Um I had full access to everything. So my security clearance was never suspended, never

pulled. Um I think most of the most of

pulled. Um I think most of the most of these leak allegations are just a media narrative to take away from the conversation that you and I are having.

The first leak accusations surfaced right as I was going live with Tucker.

So they were just trying to take the wind out of our out of my sales, I think, a little bit um by saying don't, you know, don't listen to this guy's leaker.

>> I mean, that's that's that's what I think. That seems very reactionary to

think. That seems very reactionary to me. When when did the investigation

me. When when did the investigation start? Are you aware?

start? Are you aware?

>> I'm not I don't think there is an investigation.

>> There is an investigation.

>> No, no one no one has come to me and said you're being investigated. The only

the only the only proof there of there being an investigation is someone in the government leaking to the media saying that Kent's under investigation for being a leaker. So they they had to leak that I'm a leaker.

>> Another leaker.

>> Right. Exactly. That's why like I mean I take it seriously. The FBI has ruined innocent people's lives like General Flynn with an accusation before. So, I I I take it seriously. I'm confident I didn't leak any classified information.

Um, but at the same time, like, we kind of know what the game is here. Um, and

if they really were going to investigate me, they would come to me and say, "Hey, you're being investigated, or we're going to ask you some questions, etc." Uh, if they really were going to investigate me, too, I don't think they would tip their hand ahead of time by

leaking it. That doesn't that doesn't

leaking it. That doesn't that doesn't work out in their advantage at all.

>> So, I think it's just a meeting.

>> If they knew you were leaking, why wouldn't they have fired you and then continued on with the investigation?

They just they were just going to wait for your resignation, >> right? They at least would have pulled

>> right? They at least would have pulled my clearance.

>> He's going to resign soon. Don't fire

him. He's We know he's leaking classified information, but just he's going to be gone soon.

>> Exactly. Yeah. It doesn't make any sense.

>> What's going on with the Butler assassination attempt?

>> So, um, >> are we looking into that? Yeah, I I I I think there's there's basically two schools of thought as to what's taking place right now and how he got in the

situation with with Iran that, you know, Trump should know better and and I think he he does know better. I I just gave you the more than likely I think he just got a lot of bad information. There's a

much smaller chance, but I think it can't be ignored the fact that there was several assassination attempts against President Trump that really haven't fully been explained. Um, one of which,

so Butler itself, no one is saying is linked to the FBI, but two days before the Butler assassination attempt, we arrested a guy named Asaf Mant. He was

just, you know, prosecuted and I think going to jail. U, we arrested him for being recruited by Iran to come here and attempt to assassinate President Trump uh, to avenge the death of to avenge the

killing of Kasum Smani. Mant had a a FBI informant that was working with him.

Marshawn didn't know he was an FBI informant obviously. Um and they

informant obviously. Um and they basically set up a a scheme to uh conduct an assassination against President Trump using a sniper. They

arrest Merchant and then two days later a sniper tries to kill Trump at Butler.

Uh I wanted to look for potential linkage between those events was completely shut off and and uh and blocked from that.

>> You were with NCTC the the National Counterterrorism Center.

>> Why would they cut you off? That seems

like uh definitely possible terrorism, especially considering the first one was supposedly sent by Iran.

>> Certainly. Yeah. Exactly. I I don't know. Again, we were told, hey, that

know. Again, we were told, hey, that Mant trial is ongoing, so you can't look into any of the information. You can look you can look

information. You can look you can look at a little bit of the information, but we can't we can't really do much there.

But I my my question was always, you know, is is there any linkage between anyone that Merant talked to and the people who were there at Butler and Crooks? You know, because we can say all

Crooks? You know, because we can say all day long they're not they're not linked, but are we sure that we had everything that Mant was doing under control? Is

there any linkage between those two events under from from my vantage point, I didn't see that investigation being done very thoroughly? I think this matters.

>> Who's conducting that investigation?

>> That was all the the FBI.

>> Oh, the FBI.

>> Yeah. I think this matters in the terms of what we're talking about because you had Butler, you had the other assassination attempt at West Palm Beach and then you had once Trump came into office, you had several breaches of his

his security perimeter. Um, you had the famous stoppage of the escalator at the UN. You had when he went out to dinner,

UN. You had when he went out to dinner, there was the the the table of code pink protesters who sat down next to them.

Um, and then you had the the police officer who I I think is probably a good patriotic American, but he was armed. He

wasn't part of the president's detail come up and shake President Trump's hand. like so basically circumventing

hand. like so basically circumventing the the Secret Service. And then you had the assassination of Charlie Kirk and and Charlie was one of the most vocal

advocates against a regime change war inside of Iran. Uh and he was advocating heavily uh that we change our stance uh in in regards to our relationship with

with Israel. He was in the White House

with Israel. He was in the White House uh lobbying President Trump to not attack Iran in the leadup to the 12-day war. So Charlie would have been very

war. So Charlie would have been very very much against what was going on what's going on right now. He's then

killed in September. And so I think it's irresponsible for us not to look at all of these things on a broader timeline and see where they fit into what's taking place right now.

>> Are you saying that you don't think that the kid that's been propped up to have killed Charlie is the is the guy?

>> I'm not saying that at all. I mean that that that kid his fingerprints are on the gun. um that case is going to be

the gun. um that case is going to be made. Uh what I do know is that NCTC was

made. Uh what I do know is that NCTC was investigating the foreign any any foreign linkage not necessarily just to the suspect to Robinson, but any foreign linkage that could have taken place uh

regarding that case. And again, we were stopped really early on from from thoroughly investigating and all and all that I can say is that we had more foreign connections. I'm not saying a

foreign connections. I'm not saying a foreign government, but I'm saying foreign connections to look into to thoroughly do our due diligence from from an an investigatory standpoint.

That that in my opinion was not done.

Now, the FBI will tell you we got our guy. He turned himself in. His

guy. He turned himself in. His

fingerprints are on the gun. Um there's

been some debate over whether or not he confessed. I guess we'll see when he

confessed. I guess we'll see when he goes to court. But now that the whole the case is being handled 100% by Utah.

Um, and again, considering how prominent Charlie Kirk was, uh, I I think it's it's important that we we continue that investigation and that every angle is looked into and then

a complete investigation actually takes place. And from what I saw, that did not

place. And from what I saw, that did not happen.

>> So, this is going to wind up just like JFK.

>> I hope not. I hope not. I think we have the ability to to really look into every aspect of it, no matter what the truth is. Um, and no matter where that leads

is. Um, and no matter where that leads us, and again, like look, people are saying like, why are you why are you speaking cryptically, I can't speculate.

I can only tell you what I know. And the

only thing I know for sure is that our due diligence was not done on looking at the foreign links. The rest of the case could be can be rock solid. If they've

got Tyler Robinson, >> saying there are foreign links, >> there's foreign connections we need to look into.

>> What are those connections?

>> That that I can't get into because that's going to that's all tied up inside of classified channels essentially. Um, but there was more work

essentially. Um, but there was more work we needed to do. And now I'm not saying like, you know how an investigation works. You chase down 99 leads and and

works. You chase down 99 leads and and 100 leads and 99 of them are BS and you get one good one. So even the things that I know of that I don't want to speculate about, half of them could be half, 75%, 90% of them could be trash

leads, but there's stuff that we need to look down. Charlie was a very

look down. Charlie was a very influential figure. He traveled the

influential figure. He traveled the world. He traveled the nation. There was

world. He traveled the nation. There was

a lot of people from all over the place looking and watching Charlie Kirk speak there. There was people speculating

there. There was people speculating about what was going to happen to Charlie Kirk online ahead of time. So,

there's there's more work that we needed to do uh in regards to foreign linkage to to the the Kirk assassination.

Man, I just it's just I I just don't understand why you wouldn't want to know why you wouldn't conduct a full investigation on who tried to kill you if you're the president of the United

States, >> right?

>> I just that does not compute in my brain, >> right?

>> Why would you not want to know?

>> Especially after we were told for quite some time that Thomas Krooks was an enigma. We didn't know who he was. He's

enigma. We didn't know who he was. He's

just this crazy kid. He had no online footprint. You know, we were told for a

footprint. You know, we were told for a while that they couldn't get into his devices, that they were locked, couldn't get into his devices. And then when they said they finally got into his the FBI finally said they got into his devices, they were like, "No, there's nothing

there." Well, fast forward a couple

there." Well, fast forward a couple months and Tucker Carlson's investigative journalist finds a full online persona of this kid. He's

communicating with other people. He's

commenting on uh YouTube videos. He's

he's interacting with people that are overseas. So, there's more work there to

overseas. So, there's more work there to be done clearly. And there was a big rush to say like, well, we we shot the sniper. He's kind of an enigma. We don't

sniper. He's kind of an enigma. We don't

know anything about him, but case closed. You know, cremate the body 10

closed. You know, cremate the body 10 days later.

>> Tucker's the one that came up with all that.

>> Tucker's Tucker's investigative journalist that he that works on Tucker's team found Krooks's online persona. Yeah.

persona. Yeah.

>> And the FBI didn't >> The FBI or the FBI didn't report it? I I

don't know what the case is.

>> Where does Tulsi stand in all this stuff?

She's obviously in a in a tough spot.

So, I don't want to say anything else that's going to put her in a in a in a tougher spot than she's already in.

She's she's doing the best that she can.

>> How many people up there are against what we're doing?

>> It's hard to put a number on it. Look, I

mean, you know how the government is.

>> Maybe a percentage.

>> Yeah.

Most people that serve in the government, I found um they want to make their boss happy and they don't want to they they don't want any friction at work and they want to salute and they want to move out.

>> You know, I think that's where everybody's lost it.

>> 100%. I agree.

job is to protect and serve the people of the United States.

>> Yeah. Yep. Yeah. And look, there's a lot of good patriots that are still there who think that they're they're doing the the right thing. And this is a dilemma that I had. I was like, "Well, do I stay

here and do I soldier on and be a good soldier and and you know, do I show up every day and, you know, do my darnest?"

And then if the the big strategic picture gets messed up, well, that's not really on me. You know, I did that for 20 plus years uh in the military and in in the agency and kind of see where that got us, right? When we knew better, see

where that got us. And so, like, like I said, you know, 20 plus years ago, I made a promise to myself if I ever had the ability to speak out and do and and try to get us on a better path, I would do so.

If my if my late wife hadn't gotten killed, if I hadn't been through the experiences I had been through, I I wouldn't I don't think have the clarity and the courage to do what I'm doing now. So, I I am sympathetic to people

now. So, I I am sympathetic to people who are inside who are still like, "Hey, I'm just a you know, I'm just a guy. I'm

not that important. I'm trying to do my job. I'll do what I'm told." However,

job. I'll do what I'm told." However,

the people who came in, you know, with President Trump um in key leadership positions that are a part of this movement and and leading this movement, I think they've got to reflect on what

we ran on because this is not what we ran on and they have to live with it.

And so, they can either make a decision to try and influence the situation from inside, but once they realize they can't influence that situ that situation inside, then they have a a choice to make. Do

they stay and be complicit with it or or do they leave and try and get us back on the right path?

>> In your mind, how do we get out of this thing? I mean, we're in it now with

thing? I mean, we're in it now with Iran.

>> Yeah, >> we're in it.

>> How does this end? How do we get out of this? What are the options?

this? What are the options?

>> If we don't deal with the Israelis, then this thing will just keep going.

There might be fits and starts like maybe this fiveday ceasefire will work.

I'm a little skeptical. I'm hopeful. Um,

but unless we restrain the Israelis and tell them like you're done and if you continue to attack and you continue to do things without telling us and asking us without asking us first, we're paying

for it. You're going to ask us first.

for it. You're going to ask us first.

Then we are going to negate our other part of the deal. And our part of the deal says that we defend Israel and we provide their Iron Dome system. We

provide their air defense. We provide a lot of their defense.

>> We provide their Iron Dome. We well we provide >> they don't even have a iron.

>> We provide a lot of the funding for the Iron Dome. For sure. For sure. So I

Iron Dome. For sure. For sure. So I

would I would say to the Israelis very bluntly. You're done going on the

bluntly. You're done going on the offense. We will tell you what

offense. We will tell you what operations you can conduct. If you

disobey us and you don't run your operations by us that we're paying for.

Then we are going to start taking away features of your defense system to the point where all you can do with your military basically is stay on the defense. That's the only way to restrain

defense. That's the only way to restrain the Israelis in my opinion. I think

we're past the point of being able to have like, "Hey, nice conversations."

Like, "Hey, could you guys please not?"

Because every time we say, "Could you please not?" The Israelis say, "Yeah,

please not?" The Israelis say, "Yeah, sure. That sounds good." And they turn

sure. That sounds good." And they turn around and they conduct strikes that basically negate any kind of negotiation that we're we're trying to pursue.

>> I mean, didn't Netanyahu literally just say that?

>> He he Yeah. Again,

>> this with with this statement I just >> again, as frustrating as people as I get with the Israelis sometimes, they're not very subtle. Like the Israelis are not

very subtle. Like the Israelis are not doing a lot of like lying and BSing to us. Like they're pretty upfront with

us. Like they're pretty upfront with what they're doing and what they plan to do. So I would take them at their word

do. So I would take them at their word and I would just say no, you're not cuz we're paying for all of this and we have to restrain them. And and I know a lot of people are going to be very very frustrated when I say that because there's people who really like Israel.

And I'm not saying like you cut off Israel, you know, you whatever. I'm not

saying any of that. I'm saying you take away their the resources that they have right now to go on the offense. Make it

so Israel can only defend themselves.

that's fine, but they can't go on the offense anymore.

Once we do that and once we restrain the Israelis, then I think we have a place where we can use our allies in the Gulf.

We can use the Omanis, the Qataris, etc. to get the Iranians to come to the table and come up with a way that we can reopen the Straits of Hormuz. I think

we're going to need to say to the Iranians, okay, um, we need to lift sanctions on some of their oil. We have

to give them something. So, I think lifting the sanctions and letting them get a lot of their oil introduced back into the world market, I think that's actually a pretty good carrot to get them to the to the table. And that's

also going to help lower the price of the pump and lower the and and get more uh oil and petrochemicals flowing for for the further lighters and everything else the world needs in in terms of

energy. Um, but again, step one is

energy. Um, but again, step one is restraining the Israelis. That's the

only way I can see out of this. And

look, we're going to have to make some concessions. We're going to have to say,

concessions. We're going to have to say, "Hey, we'll work with whoever there is there in Iran. We're going to have to give them red lines that might need to be enforced every now and again like you your proxies will not attack us. You

will stop attacking the Gulf countries otherwise this will continue. But at

this point they know we're pretty serious about using force. I think we have to show them now that we're serious about using diplomacy and getting to the table.

>> What are the chances you think that'll happen?

>> Every day that goes by less and less.

right now. Again, look, I know I know you're frustrated at President Trump. I

know probably a lot of your viewers are frustrated at President Trump. I think

if President Trump sits and thinks about where we are and how we got here, I think he'll understand that we're in a bad spot and we need to get out of it.

And in order to get out of it, he needs to take drastic action. Now, that's

where the good news is, and this is what gives me some hope. President Trump is good at taking drastic action. He is

decisive. He is unpredictable. But in

terms of doing big things, that's the story of President Trump's life. He can

do it. So I think other presidents in this situation, they wouldn't be able to rapidly extricate us from this. I think

Trump can. He needs to listen to his core beliefs and he needs to listen to different advisers and he needs to have the courage to restrain the Israelis.

Then I think he can do it. It gets

harder and harder every day that goes on though. If he's got this 5-day window

though. If he's got this 5-day window that he that he's created for himself, he needs to use it and he needs to pursue it aggressively. At the end of that 5day window, I think it's going to be exponentially more difficult.

>> I mean, what do you think? I mean,

Iran's literally saying there are no negotiations going on, >> right?

>> What do you think?

>> I do you think there are or do you think there are not?

>> I'm sure we're trying. I'm I'm sure we're trying. Um I we have some people

we're trying. Um I we have some people that I know are probably aggressively reaching out now. Are they getting responses? I don't know. I I I just

responses? I don't know. I I I just think that the Iranians after us killing so many of the negotiators um and so many of the leaders so many of the leadership there and then us basically saying after the 12-day war

that like we used the negotiations as a ruse. I don't think that helps cuz I

ruse. I don't think that helps cuz I think before again there was that tension inside of Iran where you had the clerics and you had some of the moderates that were saying like okay we won't make a nuclear bomb. We we are interested in some engagement with the

Americans. We would like a deal. But

Americans. We would like a deal. But

then you had the the hardliners. You had

the students of Kasam Somani who were like, uh-uh, absolutely not. Let's go on the offensive. Let's use our proxies to

the offensive. Let's use our proxies to kill these guys. Let's let's bleed them out of the Middle East. Um, so right now, who's winning that argument inside Iran? I fear the hardliners winning that

Iran? I fear the hardliners winning that argument inside of Iran because every Iranian leader that they target and they kill, I mean, Trump even said it today when he was at the plane side when he when he was plain side,

they he was asked, "Who are you talking with inside of Iran?" And he said, "I don't want to name them because then they might get killed." Well, they might get killed by the Israelis because the Israelis don't want us to have negotiation.

>> This is crazy, John.

>> It's insane. No. No. It's insane.

>> This is crazy.

>> It's insane. So, the Iranian >> You're saying that he's not saying that because if he if he names a name, the Israelis will kill them.

>> I didn't say he said.

>> You're saying You're saying that we can't that I just don't understand how like essentially you're saying we just need to tell them no.

>> We have to. And not just tell them no, you have to take things away from them.

You you can't just say because we've said no to them before. How forcefully,

I don't know. I think it's pretty debatable. But right now, they're having

debatable. But right now, they're having their cake and they're eating it, too. I

mean, they're we are doing all the heavy lifting in this war for them, but we're also continuing to provide them so much military assistance. We're we're

military assistance. We're we're providing their defense package for them. So, we have to go to them. And we

them. So, we have to go to them. And we

have to say, not just no, but you're going to run any strikes by us. And

also, you're not going on the offense anymore. You're done being on the

anymore. You're done being on the offense. If you're attacked, we'll back

offense. If you're attacked, we'll back you up. If you guys want to do military

you up. If you guys want to do military operations on your own border, that's your country. Fine. What takes place now

your country. Fine. What takes place now in Iran, that affects us, that affects the GCC, that affects the Straits of Hormuz and World Energy. You're done. We

have to say that to them and we have to take away things that make it so that they can only do their own defense. They

can't go on the offense. Until we do that, I don't think the Iranians actually will take us very seriously.

>> We don't have a problem doing that to any other country in the world.

>> Pretty crazy, right? Why do we have reluctancy to do it to Israel?

>> I mean, there's obviously the Israeli lobby factor, uh, Apac and all the other surrogates that that spend so much money on our elections. There's major donors.

Miriam Medson gave I mean, someone can look this up. Hundreds like I think hundred million dollars to to Trump's campaign. And she's not the onlyion.

campaign. And she's not the onlyion.

>> I think someone can look it up. I'm not

sure exactly off the top of my head.

Significant. And there's other really prominent donors that are very pro-Israel, many of whom are dual citizens. Um

citizens. Um >> Oh, yeah. I mean, the uh owner only fans, he just died today, >> right? Big AP.

>> right? Big AP.

>> He was he was the biggest donor to APEC, right? Did you know that?

right? Did you know that?

>> I I I just learned that today actually.

I had I had to check that myself because I I wasn't aware of that until he dead now. But

dead now. But

>> yeah. Yeah. So, we've got a pimp who funds Apac so that we can go to Yeah.

make it make sense. But I think the Israeli lobby is a part of it. But I

also think that there is a massive uh outpouring of support from like the evangelical community in America, evangelical Christians. Um and also I

evangelical Christians. Um and also I think a lot of people, especially the baby boomer generation, have just been led to believe that Israel is a democracy. The Israelis, you know, they

democracy. The Israelis, you know, they speak English. They sound like us.

speak English. They sound like us.

They're I've I've dealt with the Israelis quite a bit. Like they're

they're pretty pleasant to deal with.

They're easy to deal with. I mean,

because a lot of them are educated in America. uh you can it's easy to get

America. uh you can it's easy to get complacent around the Israelis because like they don't have that foreign feel.

Um and so they do a good job of selling hey we have the same interest here man we're just this we're the same same. So

a lot of it is financial you have a spiritual component to it and then you also have the Israelis basically by providing us with a lot of intelligence uh and potential access even though I

think a lot of that is to inform us is to influence us rather than inform.

Yeah, you had already mentioned that a lot of that stuff isn't in the intel pipeline, >> right? Exactly.

>> right? Exactly.

>> What is the intel pipeline?

>> What what is it?

>> What is the flow of intel from the field to the top?

>> Well, I mean it depends on it depends on what what manner of intelligence it is.

Um but stuff that we get and you you know this from your your your past life when we get information especially from like a foreign liaison service like it always has that caveat like could be

used to influence and inform so everyone knows what they're reading. If you want to lean heavily on the inform side and and you're a partner of ours that has access to senior decision makers, you bypass the intel guys because they're

going to check your stuff. They're going

to put it through a vetting process.

They're going to put it through analytical tradecraft. If you want to

analytical tradecraft. If you want to short circuit that, then you go directly to key decision makers and you say, "Hey, I've got some intel for you. It

hasn't gone through the intel channels."

And and a lot of those senior decision makers, although they have access to 18 intelligence agencies and top secret clearances, they're not familiar with intel. And so they might not know that

intel. And so they might not know that there's a vetting process that needs to take place or things are happening so quick, they don't have time to think about it. So the Israelis with their

about it. So the Israelis with their access and again a lot of that access comes from the media, it comes from the donors, it comes from just a certain familiarity and comfort that we have with the Israelis. Um they're they're

able to to push that in there. we get

intel I mean the intel as you know it's it's not 100% it's not always accurate but when we get intelligence from the field whether it's from a human source signal or a liaison there's a vetting process that has to take place there

before it goes in finished intel and then usually it's explained you know how we got the intel um again the Israelis have done a really good job of putting an inr run on on that system to to

circumvent it >> yeah you know the reason I'm asking I'm just wondering if the which you pretty much already described it if the intelligence that Iran had nuclear weapons went through the proper

channels.

>> It didn't.

>> We know it didn't.

>> It just didn't.

>> Who's the gate? Who's the gate that's keeping real intel from getting to Trump?

>> That's a good question. I mean, he in theory has control over who he has around him. He's the president. He's the

around him. He's the president. He's the

command. He's the commander-in-chief.

>> Somebody's stopping real information to get from getting to him.

>> Yeah. Clearly. Um or maybe he just doesn't want to hear it. I don't know what the case is. I

>> You think he might not want to hear it?

>> I think he got sold like a pretty clean equation. They were like, "Hey, the the

equation. They were like, "Hey, the the protesters are protesting. The Iranians

at the negotiating table have said they still want to enrich because they again they move them moving that red line, the Israelis and their allies moving that red line and making Trump basically think that the US policy is no

enrichment. It was very effective." And

enrichment. It was very effective." And

so they made it seem like the the negotiations had stalled out when in fact I I don't think they had. I think

Steve Wickoff could have gotten us a deal back in June. I think they just sold him a very simple rushed um rushed equation to get us into this conflict. A

big a big part of getting a quick action like this is rushing the president and telling him, "Hey, the protesters were just out there in June. We don't have time in July, I'm sorry, in January. We

don't have time for a long deliberation.

We need to conduct these strikes now."

And so, I think they took away a lot of his decision-m space and time and only put a handful of advisers around him.

And maybe those are the people that he requested, but because he thought that he was under the gun for for a for a time crunch, I don't think he had enough time to really fully assess that.

>> A lot of people are saying that your resignation and change of heart is because of influence from your wife.

>> Is there any validity to that?

>> No. No, not at all.

I mean, we share very similar views. one

of the reasons we probably got married.

But >> right on.

>> Yeah, >> I got to address it. It's out there.

>> Sure. Sure.

>> But all right, Joe, I want to take a break. When we come back, I just want to

break. When we come back, I just want to talk about how what this means for the midterms, what this means for the le next election, what this means for the Republican party, what this means for MAGA.

>> Yeah, absolutely.

>> Most gear looks good until you actually start using it. Then you find out pretty quickly what holds up and what doesn't.

That's why I keep coming back to ROA. These aren't just lifestyle

to ROA. These aren't just lifestyle sunglasses pretending to be performance gear. I've worn mine training, on the

gear. I've worn mine training, on the range, traveling, and outdoors for long days, and they stay locked in place the entire time. They're incredibly

entire time. They're incredibly lightweight. The optics are razor sharp

lightweight. The optics are razor sharp with zero glare. And you honestly forget you're even wearing them, but they still

look clean enough to wear anywhere. Not

overly tactical, just modern, functional design that works everyday. ROA was born in Austin, Texas, and everything about them reflects that performance first

mindset. And if you need prescription

mindset. And if you need prescription lenses, they offer both sunglasses and eyeglasses options built to the same standard. And whether you're outfitting

standard. And whether you're outfitting a law enforcement unit, a military team, or looking for corporate gifts that don't suck, ROA offers wholesale partnerships to make it happen. ROA

isn't just eyewear. It's confidence you can wear every single day. They're the

real deal. Ready to upgrade your eyewear? Check them out for yourself at

eyewear? Check them out for yourself at roka.com and use code SRS for 20% off sitewide at checkout. That's roka.com

and use code SRS.

Want more from the Sha Ryan Show? Join

our Patreon today for more clips and exclusive content. You'll get an

exclusive content. You'll get an exclusive look behind the scenes where you can watch the guests interact with the team and explore the studio before every episode. Plus, unlock bonus

every episode. Plus, unlock bonus content like our extra intel segments where we ask our guests additional questions, our new SRS on-site specials,

and access to an entire tactical training library you will not find anywhere else. And the best part,

anywhere else. And the best part, Patreon members can ask our guests questions directly. Your insights can

questions directly. Your insights can help shape the show. Join us on Patreon now. Support the mission and become part

now. Support the mission and become part of the Sha Ryan Show's story. All

right, Joe, we're back from the break.

Midterms are coming up.

>> Yeah.

>> Next election's coming up.

>> Yep.

>> MAGA split.

>> Yep.

>> CNN just put a what? A poll out that said 100% of MAGA.

>> What do they say? 100% of MAGA supports the Iran war.

>> I don't think they're wrong. I just

think a lot of people have left MAGA.

A lot of people have left me negative.

>> Well, that end, I I think our um our political opponents would love us to believe that this very unpopular thing we're doing is popular to convince us to keep doing it. Yeah.

>> I mean, I just I'd be very wary obviously of CNN. I don't know why we're even listening to CNN. It's insane.

>> I'm not that that came from somebody on the staff here.

>> No, but I saw that too. Yeah.

>> So, >> yeah.

>> But I don't I actually I don't watch any mainstream media. Not Fox, not MS, not

mainstream media. Not Fox, not MS, not any of it. It's all garbage.

>> It is. But what what does this mean? I

mean, what are you seeing?

>> So, I think the conventional wisdom would tell you and I think the president was told this. I think the president was told that wartime presidents are always popular. Like, if you look at Bush's

popular. Like, if you look at Bush's approval rating after both Afghan the launch into Afghanistan and Iraq, it was it was his highest his highest ratings yet. So, that's the conventional wisdom.

yet. So, that's the conventional wisdom.

The conventional wisdom also says that most Americans, they don't really care about foreign policy. Um, but what they do care about is they care about the price of the pump. and look at what this conflict has already done at the price of the pump. Look what it's already done to cost living. We already had an

inflation crisis and Trump was working on getting us out of it. But look at the effect that the war, especially what's happening in the straits, is going to have on all these everyday issues that your your average really hardworking

person who's, you know, busting their butt to stay above water. They might not say like that's because of the Iran war and dig deeply into the policy, but they're going to be like, "Oh, the party that's in power right now screwed this

up. I'm going to vote for the other

up. I'm going to vote for the other guy." And then you have the MAGA issue.

guy." And then you have the MAGA issue.

>> It's not even just this country. We're

talking about a global economic depression here.

>> Yeah.

global economic depression.

>> Yeah. Potential famine because the fertilizer I mean it's just >> the m the famines. I don't America I don't think we will but the amount of fertilizer that needs those prochemicals

that come out of the that come out of the Gulf that that rely on the Straits of Hermuz flowing freely I mean that's a major problem. It's going to be a major

major problem. It's going to be a major problem I think first for Europe I think for Africa for Asia. Um I think America we can we can insulate ourselves to a certain extent. We're definitely going

certain extent. We're definitely going to feel it in terms of the inflation.

We're already feeling it. The gas prices are back up like we're back in the in the Biden era again unfortunately. Um,

so I think that's that's going to factor heavily on on voters. And then the MAGA issue, man, the people that like were hardcore who don't who were small dollar donors to President Trump and and to

candidates like me when I was running with his endorsement, them not coming out or them being disenfranchised or them being um endorsed on this war. He

endorsed me twice. Yeah.

>> Trump endorsed you.

>> Yeah. Twice.

>> On his speech day made it sound like he just felt sorry for you because your wife died in combat.

>> Yep. And he just like handed you a job.

Which which honestly I was listening to that I'm like, if that's how you hand jobs out to your administration, no wonder we're in the place we're at.

>> Yeah.

>> You just handed out pity jobs. Here you

go.

>> Yeah. I mean,

>> maybe look at their background and you know, this is how we wind up with people like Sebastian Gorka.

>> I think Trump just got into a they put him in a position where he needed to say something about Banny. I think he's frustrated because I'm doing these I'm doing these media appearances. Um, so

he's going to fire back. like I just for me I don't take it personally. I I want him to just focus on what we're talking about, focus on getting us out of this crisis. And then also like like you said

crisis. And then also like like you said for the midterms, I mean you're going to need a lot of hardcore MAGA people to come out to knock on doors to do to do that hardcore work. Um because working

elections, it's it's not easy. It's not

fun. It's not glamorous. The MAGA base, Trump's base, they're hardworking people and they got him across the finish line in 26. A lot of them, now it's debatable

in 26. A lot of them, now it's debatable how much, but a good chunk of them are going to have a really hard time doing that because of the way this last year has gone.

>> Don't come banging on my door. I

don't want to hear it. I don't want to hear more of those lies.

>> I I hear that from a lot of people. I

hear it from a lot of people.

>> It's everything, Joe. It's everything.

>> Did you see the glyphosate stuff?

>> I did.

I did.

>> The the Make America Healthy Again movement, >> right?

Immunity.

>> Immunity.

>> Yep.

>> Because of what? A national security issue. Do you know how many people

issue. Do you know how many people died of cancer last year?

618,000.

That's not a national security concern.

You know where the highest concentration of glyphosate is?

>> It's in Iowa. Do you know where the highest concentration of cancer is?

>> Iowa.

>> It's in Iowa.

>> Yeah.

>> And he just gave them immunity.

>> Yeah. I mean,

>> we're calling the fentanyl crisis a national security concern. That's a

100,000 people. Cancer is 618,000 people in one year.

>> Yeah.

>> And he just gave them immunity.

>> Yeah.

Yeah. I think your I think your frustration, your anger is felt by a lot of people who voted, who campaigned >> the Epstein files, >> who believed the Epstein files. Yeah.

>> What the is that?

>> Right. Are you serious right now? We're

just going to let people that are raping and killing and exploiting kids sexually just run free. But we're going to put

we're going to sit the uh FBI on joke.

>> It's insanity. And it's going to have a ramification. I know I know he's

ramification. I know I know he's probably not being told this uh at the White House, but it's going to have a ramification on the elections. It just

it just will. I mean, the the coalition that we we had was something, I think, very very special in the sense that you had a lot of people who probably didn't don't consistently vote, who we got

mobilized with our message. Um,

President Trump's economic populism, his ab his desire, at at least stated desire to go out for the deep state, no new wars, the make America healthy again

movement. um all of all of those

movement. um all of all of those coalescing into what became the MAGA movement in 2024, giving him the electoral college and the popular vote.

Um I think over the course of the last year, that coalition has been very very fractured. And people will say I'm

fractured. And people will say I'm fracturing the coalition right now. I'm

not fracturing the coalition. The

coalition is very fractured because of our actions. I want to preserve the

our actions. I want to preserve the coalition. I want the coalition to last

coalition. I want the coalition to last because I think that formula I think what what President Trump and Vice President Mance ran on in 24 is the right message. It is the right formula

right message. It is the right formula for America and for our country. But

we've got to be serious. If we promised to deliver and we didn't deliver, we've got to be serious about that and we've got to show people that we're going to correct that.

>> I don't think there's any coalition left.

>> I I don't disagree with you. I I don't disagree with you. The formula they made in 2024 though shows that it can be done. Um, and

done. Um, and >> in going after the deep state, we haven't seen one indictment. We haven't

seen anything. Nothing. We've seen Look the other way.

>> Are we still talking about Jeffrey Epstein? That's what we see.

Epstein? That's what we see.

>> No. The the CIA, the FBI, all these powerful institutions are still very much intact and they're still very much calling the shots. Um, and that's a huge problem for the the the freedom and

security of our country. So, there's a lot of things this administration I think needs to get serious about if we're going to fix things. Um, obviously

this war being the most most pressing, but I think this last year of us attempting to govern is going to have a major ramification in the midterms and then definitely in 28 if we don't get

serious about turning it around for sure.

>> What are your aspirations now? What's

next for you?

>> The next week or two? I really want to push as hard as I can to attempt to reach the president. And I know that puts me in the line in the the line of fire and in the news cycle and people sniping at me online. Um, but I'm that

that's the only plan I truly had leaving this like the way I look at it is I already kind of got to do my childhood dream like in our our old line of work, you know. Uh, I got to do that and

you know. Uh, I got to do that and everything else is kind of kind of gravy. I want to be able to serve my

gravy. I want to be able to serve my country. I care deeply about the future

country. I care deeply about the future of this country. I care deeply about the the future that we leave for our kids.

So, whatever capacity I end up working or serving at, as long as I feel like I can influence to make sure I'm using my life experiences and what I've been through to affect a better outcome for

our country, and I think national security is probably the the best place that I can do that, then I'm happy. Um,

I I didn't take resigning lightly, but once I made the decision, I felt clarity that I don't think I felt ever in my life uh that this is the right thing to do. So,

do. So, >> hope you're the first of many. Yeah.

>> That make a statement like that.

>> Yeah.

>> Are you worried for your safety?

>> No, I'm not. I'm worried for my family, but as a father, you know, you're always worried. Always worried for your family.

worried. Always worried for your family.

Um I have a strong family, strong extended family, strong friend network.

Um like we were just talking about, you know, at the break and when I got here, the outpouring of support from from veterans, from people I served with, from, you know, people that are part of the the whatever whatever movement this

is, it's been amazing. Um, so obviously the the security worries are always there in the back in the back of my head. Um, but you know, I think God's on

head. Um, but you know, I think God's on our side and I think we'll be okay.

>> Are we going to see you in a midterm your name pop up in any midterm elections?

>> Not in a midterm, man. I I got I got the running for for Congress out of my system. Um, I'm living in Virginia right

system. Um, I'm living in Virginia right now and I don't think there's much of a prayer where I live for a Republican of my politics to get elected. Um, so no, definitely not in the midterms. I don't really have a desire to run for office

again. It was a good experience. I'm

again. It was a good experience. I'm

glad I did it. I'm also glad it didn't work out cuz I I've kind of had to interact enough now with Congress in my my last job that man, that does not look enjoyable at all. Um, but I want to

serve in this capacity. If we're able to get someone uh into the White House who wants to put this country first, they're going to need people that understand the

the national security apparatus and how to tackle it and reorient it towards American priorities. So, I'd be I'd be

American priorities. So, I'd be I'd be happy to serve in that capacity.

>> What about 2028?

>> Same thing. I think I I think I could help uh craft good policies and and come up with attack plans.

>> I mean, about a run >> run. I I have no plans to run um for for

>> run. I I have no plans to run um for for president in 2028. Running for Congress is challenging enough. I can't imagine doing it in 28. A problem with our pres with our politics in general is the amount of fundraising that you need to

do. And I hated doing that. And I really

do. And I hated doing that. And I really have zero desire ever again to go ask people to cut me a check. But you have to like you you you've got to be a relentless fundraiser to make it in

politics today. And it's tough because

politics today. And it's tough because there's so much money out there. And

this is this is like literally how our our politicians end up getting bought.

Like if they don't take the check, then the other guy their their competitor is going to take the check. And so that's what a lot of it comes down to. And I'd

much rather stay in the the national security realm where I think I I can contribute more anyways than than ever have to go beg donors for money ever again.

>> How do we solve the APEC problem?

>> I think we need we need heavy legislation and regulation on the ability for foreign governments to come in and even using cutouts because APAC

will say no no no this isn't any this isn't affiliated with Israel. These are

Americans who support Israel, and that I think by and large is true, but they're advocating for policies that just support a foreign government. So there

there's got to be some regulation on, you know, foreign foreign agents.

There's got to be some regulation on uh having political fundraising packs and and mechanisms that just support the agenda of a foreign country. What that

is, I don't exactly know. I mean,

there's there's >> What is it? What what does that change if they register as a foreign agent?

>> Cuz the Saudis got a huge >> Yeah.

>> huge lobbying for >> Yeah.

>> So what does that change?

>> I don't think it changes much. I think

you just are aware. It's more of a upfront to my knowledge. Someone can

fact check me on this. I I'm not a foreign agent registry expert by any means, but I think once someone is registered under FAR, like they can't get a government contract.

>> Okay.

>> Um I think they can resign from the position they're in where they had to register under FAR. And then I think they can slide back into I don't it's not like a forever thing by any means.

Um the problem with the money side is that the Supreme Court basically ruled that that money is speech and just like they can't tell you what you can you can and can't say, the government can't tell

you how you can spend your money. So if

you want to put your money into a super PAC, you can put an unlimited amount in there. And I I think that's basically

there. And I I think that's basically been the death of our political system ever since that that makes it makes it very possible for for elections to be bought because money is funible. I think

it's hard to actually create a firewall around that.

All right, Joe, we're wrapping up the interview here.

Got a hot question for you. Totally

different change of pace here. So, try

to lighten it up a little bit. Joe, the

last time you were on the show, we aired a clip called Inside the Military's Most Secretive Unit. That thing did 2.8

Secretive Unit. That thing did 2.8 million views on YouTube. This time

around, we actually had Claude, the AI, scrape the data on your YouTube performance, dig through sources across the internet, and help us build this question.

>> Oh, man.

>> And what came back was very interesting.

when you were operating in that secretive unit doing those missions most people will never hear about. What was

your go-to combat loadout and why? Oo,

that's a great question. So, it depends on obviously where I where I was working. Um, I would say a consistent

working. Um, I would say a consistent factor for me because I was predominantly in the Middle East in dangerous places was either a Glock 19 or or a Glock 43 for for an EDC.

>> A Glock 43.

>> Yeah. Little guy.

>> Holy you were running around with a Glock 43.

>> Depends on what I was wearing and where I was. Um, there's also what was it the

I was. Um, there's also what was it the 20? Is it the 26 as well? The 26. I

20? Is it the 26 as well? The 26. I

think it's the little fatter double stack version.

>> Um, but usually a Glock 19. I like I like the Glock 19 because it's a good you can conceal it, but it's still a fulls size pistol. You know, you got the 15 plus one.

>> Um, cameras heavily as well just for for the type of work that we did.

>> What kind of cameras? small digital

camera, like a small, you know, uh, like pocket size. Some of our guys would use

pocket size. Some of our guys would use bigger ones depending on what mission they would do. Um, but then all I did a lot of human intelligence. So, uh, a

huge part of my EDC was a pen and a paper and probably about $1,000 of cash on me. Um, because no pen, no paper, no

on me. Um, because no pen, no paper, no intel. And if you don't pay them, they

intel. And if you don't pay them, they don't come back.

>> Damn.

>> Yeah.

>> Did you carry a bolt bag or anything?

>> Uh, like a go bag. Like a little Yeah.

>> Yeah, I did. Yeah, I had a little beat up Northace uh courier bag that I still have somewhere that I got like an '05 and it was like almost a superstition that I had to take that on every

deployment with me and that would be like my little bug out of the vehicle bag.

>> Never a long gun.

>> No, definitely a long gun. Yeah. Yeah,

for sure.

>> What long gun?

>> For sure. Um so we had 416s for a little bit and then uh just standard, you know, AR.

>> No MP7. I you know I rolled with an MP7 a couple times, but it's just it's just just a little thing. The bullet I was always a little skeptical on. I never I know some guys I I'd heard people say they they shot folks with it and it was

it was fine. It did the job. It always

just seemed really little to me. Um

there's pictures of me with a with an Uzi. They used an Uzi for a trip as like

Uzi. They used an Uzi for a trip as like a lap gun in a car.

>> Used an Uzi.

>> Yeah, >> that's awesome.

>> Yeah, cuz it had the I mean it had a great suppressor on it. At the time we didn't have um we had MP5s, but we didn't have suppressed ones and the suppressor on the Uzi was sweet. So, I

use that kind as my lap gun in the car.

Big fan of the UMP45s, too. Uh, I

thought that >> Oh, You guys had those?

>> We had those. Yeah. And running around Baghdad. I thought that was great

Baghdad. I thought that was great because everything was so close quarters in Baghdad and you just needed the stopping power, especially working in a car.

>> Yeah.

>> Damn. Well, I got you a present.

>> You want to see it?

>> Absolutely.

>> It's a long gun.

>> It's a long gun. Are you serious?

>> I'm serious.

>> I thought it was going to be gummy bears.

You're in luck.

>> My kids will be happy. This is what they care about.

>> I'll give you another one. Have you seen these?

>> Holy >> Yeah, >> dude.

Was that the, >> you know, with the uh >> FBI investigation? I don't know if you're going to get cleared for this thing, but but uh yeah, this is uh this

is a Sig. The Sig Spear chambered in 6.8. Brand new optic. And then um so Sig

6.8. Brand new optic. And then um so Sig wanted me to give this to you. Wow,

that's incredible, man. Thank you so much.

>> And then Silencer Shop jumped in, too.

>> So, they put this suppressor on here.

And the good thing about Silencer Shop is once you sign up with them and you get everything done, that makes the process go a lot smoother, a lot easier getting suppressors, the class 3 item

stuff. So, anyways,

stuff. So, anyways, this is incredible, man. Thank you so much.

>> Say, what a beautiful gun.

You want to rip a couple off out back?

>> Yeah, of course.

Yeah, definitely. Man, this is beautiful.

definitely. Man, this is beautiful.

Wow. Thank you.

>> You're welcome.

>> Thank you, man.

>> Well, I just happen to have some 6.8 out there so >> Yeah.

>> When we wrap this up, we'll go.

>> You definitely wow. This is amazing.

>> We'll blow some up.

>> I really like that thing.

>> That's nice. Yeah. I've never I've haven't shot this before. It feels

really good.

>> Yeah, >> I think you're going to like it.

>> I think so, too.

>> There's a follow- on question.

>> Beautiful.

>> If you're going to go back into combat tomorrow, what would you >> if they institute the draft and we all have to go back to Iran or the Middle East?

>> They're going to be like, "Jesus Island." What would your load out look

Island." What would your load out look like today with all the new tech and weapon systems the military has developed since you were on the ground last?

>> I would need to get spun up on the the the drones and the counter drones.

>> That's what I was going to say.

>> I mean, I can, you know, talk about long guns and pistols all day long, but the fight nowadays, man, with those FPV drones and that technology, I would I would I would get hot on that as fast as

I possibly could. And then how to defend I think how to def how do you how do you defend any kind of like small formation that you have like what system can you can you carry around uh to at least have

at least have a fighting chance against those things. That'd be my my first uh

those things. That'd be my my first uh my first task.

>> I think I'd get really good at 3D printing.

>> Yeah. Exactly. Exactly. Yeah. Some that

the technology coming off the battlefield in Ukraine just incredible.

>> All right. Last thing, you know, this is live. This is live on my Patreon right

live. This is live on my Patreon right now. So, we took some questions as we

now. So, we took some questions as we were doing the interview. So, let's

crank through some of these. This is

from Ava Evans. Thank you so much, Mr. Kent, for your bravery and honesty. What

is your advice to the younger generations who may have to drive to severe to excuse me, to serve humanity in the midst of this chaos, but also do

not agree with the objective and agenda of this current administration?

to serve humanity.

>> Yeah. I think she's saying, you know, join the military.

>> Oh, to join the >> military war with Iran.

>> Yeah, >> that's what she's alluding to.

>> Look, I I hope we can be effective and and walk this back and get us out of it.

I I think a key part of that and especially for the people that are you have you have a huge audience. I I I think for people who feel like they can't do anything, I think them calling their senators, calling their congressmen,

um going to the president's websites and social medias and just saying politely that that they are against this. I think

that's probably be one of the most effective things we can we can have to to to do to get out of this. I think for people that that find themselves in the military or have to be in the military, I think your first obligation really is

to the man and woman on your left and right. Like make sure they come home,

right. Like make sure they come home, you got a job to do. That's why we're trying to sort out the policy from from from our end. Um, but before you join, I mean, take a good hard look at what's going on right now and only you can make

the decision if this is something that you're willing to support with your with your life. Um, and don't rush that

your life. Um, and don't rush that decision. Again, my goal is to make it

decision. Again, my goal is to make it so that we can send people back into the military knowing their leaders will only deploy them against a vital national security interest. Um but yeah, right

security interest. Um but yeah, right right now we need to have all all voices need to be heard right now to say that we we are against what's taking place.

Let our elected leaders know that.

>> Well said, man. Well said. This is from Leela Resto. What criteria should be met

Leela Resto. What criteria should be met before deploying US troops into conflict? How can we ensure

conflict? How can we ensure accountability from leadership when wars do not have clear objectives or protection out of or protection of outcomes? It's a great question and they

outcomes? It's a great question and they basically give the answer in there. I

think our leaders need to say before they deploy people into harm's way, this is the object. This is why I'm sending you to this country. I'm sending to this country to accomplish this military objective and then quickly be able to

articulate why that objective is in our vital national security interest in America's vital national security interest. Why if we don't take out this

interest. Why if we don't take out this threat, it's going to harm Americans.

That has to be very very clear upfront and that has to come from the commander-in-chief. I I understand

commander-in-chief. I I understand there's like the War Powers Act and there's certain things that Congress should be able to do, but as fast as things move, this largely rests at the executive branch. Unfortunately, unless

executive branch. Unfortunately, unless the Congress is willing, unless we elect enough people in Congress that are willing to withhold funding uh from the military unless for or for operations

unless there's actually a war powers declaration.

Roger that. This is from Zach. Since you

know all that we can do, which change which changes would you like to see at NCTC that would be most beneficial to citizens that we protect?

H um that's a tough one. I I I think in terms of Yeah, it's a very good question. I think

in terms of screening and vetting, it's a big part of what NCTC does to to make sure when people come into the country, they don't have ties to a terrorist organization. There's a lot of different

organization. There's a lot of different agencies that touch screening and vetting in America. In in the US government, it's a very complicated bureaucracy. I think there basically

bureaucracy. I think there basically needs to be one central clearing house for screening and vetting to decide if someone has ties to a terrorist organization or not and whether or not they should be allowed in. Problem is

there's a bunch of different ways and there's a bunch of people who have um equities and are able to say whether or not folks are let in. I think there needs to be one agency for that and that should be NCTC.

>> Roger that. It's from Dicklin.

Iran is known to harbor many terrorists who are actively training and planning to attack the US home front through sleeper cells. Former CIA targeter Sarah

sleeper cells. Former CIA targeter Sarah Adams has proved this through open intelligence channels. All this

intelligence channels. All this considered, why is Iran not a threat to the United States? So, the question was, is Iran an imminent threat? Um, and

based on what Secretary Rubio said and what we've talked about here today, the only imminent threat was Israel attacking Iran. is is is Iran a threat

attacking Iran. is is is Iran a threat to America? Iran has been a threat to

to America? Iran has been a threat to America. Uh and there's other countries

America. Uh and there's other countries that are threats to America as well. The

question is how do you deal with those threats? My my issue is us drive us

threats? My my issue is us drive us being part of the Israelis agenda, but then also using a massive conventional attack on Iran as the way of dealing with the threat that Iran poses, I think

is wrong. I think we'd be much better

is wrong. I think we'd be much better off doing targeted CT operations against Iranian proxies or Iranian leaders, not doing a massive regime change that results in the streets of Hormuz being

closed and then also a rally around the flag that reinforces the hardliners inside of Iran.

>> Do you think they would institute a draft if they had to for this war?

If they do that, then the war is going to fail really quickly because I just don't think the American people are willing to to saddle up their their sons and daughters for the draft. Um, if they

could get away with it, I think they they'd be tempted to do it because it'd be like an all all I mean all options on the table, right? Like if they say like if we get so far sucked into this thing, kind of like we did in the Iraq war

where it's like we we can only win by applying a massive amount of ground troops, Iran is so big, we can't do it with the standing military that we have right now, as big as it is. We would

have to do a draft.

Now, I I think a a a negative to the uh a downside to the all volunteer force we've had is that it's been very easy to deploy us and most Americans don't really know or care that we've been deployed because we volunteered for it.

professional soldiers. Um, I think a draft is actually a good check on that.

I think compulsory service. I think if there was more people right now who they had to go do two years in the military and they were like, "Oh crap, my two years are going to involve this Iran deployment." I think a lot more people

deployment." I think a lot more people in America. And that was felt by the

in America. And that was felt by the entire American population that every able-bodied man and woman was eligible uh for a 2-year period to go serve. Wars

like this wouldn't happen in my opinion.

That is a very interesting point of view that I have not thought about.

>> Yeah. As much as I don't like the idea of conscripting people or having mandatory service because I liked the professional warrior class that we were a part of. I like serving with volunteers problem with volunteers is man we'll just keep going back and

you'll create a professional warrior class and then we'll like I did intermarry and we'll live in our tight communities. Everybody I know is a

communities. Everybody I know is a veteran and so we have an insular community and we're the only ones that experienced the war, experienced the loss and we keep going back over and over again. Whereas if you spread out

over again. Whereas if you spread out that burden to the entire country, it makes it almost impossible to keep us at war for a prolonged period. The only

reason the Vietnam War ended is because there was popular the the people basically revolted against it because of the draft. And that's a big reason why I

the draft. And that's a big reason why I think after Vietnam they were like we can't draft people anymore. Let's create

a professional military.

Damn, I have not thought about it like that.

Makes a lot of sense. This is from Donnie.

If Iran was not an immediate threat, then what threats are there that we should be the most concerned about?

>> If Iran was not an immediate threat, >> if Iran was not an immediate threat, he wants to know what are the what are the threats that we should be most concerned about? I think we should be worried

about? I think we should be worried about the fact that we had open borders in this country for four plus years like we talked about and and the sheer volume of potential known suspected terrorists, known suspected terrorists that that are

here. Our main focus should be getting

here. Our main focus should be getting our homeland straight first and foremost. There's other threats from

foremost. There's other threats from al-Qaeda in in Yemen, al-Qaeda in Syria.

There's a lot that we don't know that's taking place in Afghanistan that Sarah's talked about at Nauseium on your show.

So, there still is CT threats out there.

I mean, there still are people that we do need to hunt down and kill because they seek to do us harm. Um, again,

that's why this this another reason why this conflict in Iran concerns me so much because all of our resources are going to be are going to be sucked up there and al-Qaeda and ISIS and all of our adversaries are going to take this

time to rebuild and probably attack.

>> And China and China, man, just they're raking in the cash right now. I mean,

this is this is working out in their favor. For people who are very very

favor. For people who are very very worried about Russia, same thing. I

mean, their their their energy is their energy surplus is going to be reintroduced to the market at a greater value, >> man.

Well, Joe, that pretty much concludes the interview, but once again, man, I I am serious.

>> Thank you for what you did. I know that was a tough decision and like I said, I know that took a lot of courage, but what an example you are, man.

>> Thanks, brother. I really appreciate it.

Thank you.

what it means to be an American. Thank

you. I appreciate it.

awesome what you're doing. So,

God bless. God bless. Thank you.

No matter where you're watching the Shawn Ryan Show from, if you get anything out of this at all, anything,

please like, comment, and subscribe. And

most importantly, share this everywhere you possibly can. And if you're feeling extra generous, head to Apple Podcast and Spotify and leave us a