transcript

Speaker 1:
[00:02] Hey, everybody, welcome to Next Up. I am Mark Halperin, Editor-in-Chief of Live Interactive Video Platform Two-Way, your host to everything Next Up. Very happy to have all you Nexters and newbie Nexters here to hang out together to talk about what is happening now and again, what's gonna happen next. We have a great show today. Ben Ferguson is back. He's the host of the Ben Ferguson Podcast, co-host of The Verdict with Ted Cruz. We love having him on, and he and I are gonna walk through some of the current politics with Iran and the midterms and everything else. Excited, always have been on. And then someone who hasn't been with us before, very knowledgeable on the story of the moment on Iran, Dr. Walid Phares is here, author of a book called Iran and Imperialist Republican US Policy. He's a longtime foreign policy advisor to people like Donald Trump and Mitt Romney. We're gonna talk to him about the latest news there and whether peace could be at hand or whether we're looking at more war. Before our two guests though, in just a moment, I'll report in my log a special deep dive on the big event coming up in Washington this weekend, the White House Correspondents' Association Dinner, where Donald Trump will be making his debut. I am, I would say borderline obsessed with what kind of comedy the president plans to bring to the dinner, what kind of game he has. My report and my log on Donald Trump and humor, the history of the White House Correspondents' Association Dinner. That's all, Next Up. Hey, let me ask you something. Do you own physical gold? Most people do not. But given the current state of the world, that's worth thinking about. Acre gold, they make it simple. You pick a plan that fits your budget, then make monthly payments. And when you've accumulated enough, they ship you a beautifully designed 24 karat Swiss gold bar. Gold is up 70% year over year, and central banks are still buying at record levels. Smart money has been moving into hard assets for a good reason. Acre gold has had subscribers stacking consistently now for six years because once you hold gold in your hand, you understand the difference between owning something real versus a number on a computer screen. Right now, they're giving away over 18 grams of gold in their Acre Declassified Sweet Steaks. You can enter for free and subscribe to gold at getacregold.com/mark. Right now, go to getacregold.com/mark. All right, next up, my reported monologue. This one, I've done a lot of reporting this week in Washington, but I've been reporting on it my whole career. The White House Correspondents' Dinner has been around for a long time, and it's become a rite of passage for presidents who until Donald Trump, they've always gone and tip the typical format of the dinner. The president does a comedy routine, a comedian does a routine, and it's a huge ballroom. It's the biggest ballroom in Washington, and lots of muckety mucks go. Bureau chiefs, people come down from New York-based news organizations. It's supposed to be for the White House Correspondents. It's sponsored by the White House Correspondents' Association, and a lot of reporters and producers and others who cover the White House go. But particularly in the Clinton years, it became the Washington weekend of social activity. And part of what made it into this mega event, two things. One is the after parties. Places like Vanity Fair would get like an embassy, a really nice embassy as a location. And after the dinner, there'd be a very exclusive party. Those parties became more opulent. They became more extravagant. And people really wanted to go to them. Not just the reporters and the government officials, members of Congress, members of the White House cabinet, but business people, celebrities. And that's the other thing that happened. Very famously, one year, a guy named Michael Kelly, who since passed away, wrote for the New York Times, wrote for the New Yorker, he invited Vaughn Hall, who was a Washington celebrity. She was Oliver North's secretary during Iran-Contra. And then people started inviting Hollywood celebrities, and particularly the TV networks. The White House Correspondents' Association, you got what we used to call print reporters, and then the TV networks. The TV networks have their entertainment divisions, ABC has got ABC primetime shows. So the network said, well, let's start inviting all the celebrities. And in the Clinton years, there hadn't been a Democrat in the White House for a while, and the Clinton culture was really into Hollywood celebrity. A lot of celebrities started going. The very first year I went to the White House Correspondents' Dinner in 1993, I went, I think George Stephanopoulos was my guest, whether he was my guest or not, I went with him. We walked over from his apartment to it, and Andrew Hsu, the actor, came with us as well. I looked, I couldn't find a picture, but I got a picture of me with George Stephanopoulos and Andrew Hsu. And so for the Clinton years, and then the Bush 43 years, and the Obama years, it was a big event. It was the biggest annual event in Washington. Every ticket sold to the dinner, lots of jockeying to go to the parties. And then the parties started to expand. They used to just be no parties, really. Then there was after parties on Saturday night after the dinner. Then Sunday, there were brunches, and then they started having Friday parties. There were other parties that had already started this week on Tuesday. So some people score in this whole thing. They say, too chummy, reporters shouldn't be palling around with government officials. Reporters shouldn't be spending money on a big black tie dinner. They should be giving money to scholarships. And in fact, there's a big scholarship component to the dinner. There are young journalists who are giving awards of scholarships. And reporters who cover the White House are singled out for achievement. But in all honesty, it's just a big fancy party. I think it gets a bum rap. And even before the controversy over President Trump, which I'll get to, people complain about the dinner. They say, it's too chummy. Honestly, ladies and gentlemen, I couldn't disagree with that more. It's good for reporters, at least one night a year, to have some access to their sources in a relaxed setting, to see old sources and old friends, and to see new ones and meet new people. So particularly after I left DC and moved to New York, I always liked the dinner as an opportunity to one stop shop and see a lot of people. And I cared a lot more about seeing government officials, some I'd never met, some I'd known but hadn't seen in a while, than I did about seeing the celebrities. One year when I worked at Bloomberg, I got to do the red carpet show before the dinner because there is a red carpet with New York Nick legend, Walt Frazier, that's a highlight for me. But the dinner, to me, is the centerpiece of the thing. The parties, whatever, the black, the red carpet, whatever. This will be Donald Trump's first time as president. He famously went in 2011 and we'll talk about that. Some people say that's why he ran for president because he was insulted at the 2011 dinner. But first time as president, and it's significant because a lot of people in his orbit have never gone. I talked to cabinet secretary this week, a very prominent person, never really had any reason to go. Trump boycotted it, first president, to boycott the dinner, his full first term. But now he's going this year. Part of why it's been such a right, a passage for presidents is you're supposed to go and kill, as the comedians say, you're supposed to go and give a great comedy speech. Now, I know lots of people, particularly people who don't like the president, say he's not funny. Trust me, he's funny. Laura Trump, his daughter-in-law, just talked to Meghan McCain and said the truth. He's really one of the funniest people she's met. He's a super funny guy, doesn't always show it. Not everybody necessarily likes his sense of humor. But typically what presidents do is they work with joke writers and the people on their speech writing team who are ostensibly funny, and they'll write a very funny speech. There are other Washington dinners where the president's supposed to do this, the gridiron dinner, the alfalfa club, but not every president goes to those, and this president has largely not gone to those. So if you think about what's the funniest speech you ever seen Donald Trump give, hard to come to mind. You might think he's funny, but he's not given very many of these set piece comedy speeches. Now there's a thing called the Al Smith dinner here in New York where Donald Trump has spoken, where he has given these kinds of speeches. Most presidents don't ad lib much at the Correspondents' Dinner. They have teleprompter, they have carefully written jokes. It's usually at the end of the speech a serious part where they celebrate the media and the First Amendment, but most of it's jokes. And as we know, this president doesn't love the teleprompter, likes to ad lib. So I'm super curious to see when he comes in here, what he does, how he handles it. Now, again, it's been a right of passage. And I think that presidents Clinton and Biden have been pretty good when they've spoken at this dinner. Pretty good. Clinton probably better than Biden. And Clinton had some great moments, but the people who really killed were Obama and Bush, Bush 43. And both of them went high concept at times. They chose, instead of just doing a conventional read a bunch of jokes. They had some high concept stuff. We'll talk about that. But the idea of this is to make fun of people, but not go too far in making fun of them. And the idea is to be self-deprecating. They've used videos and different kind of props. George W. Bush did two things that were super creative. And again, it's like a high-wire act. I said right a passage before, it's a bit of a high-wire act. The reporters and others in the room, the other guests, the news executives and all the corporate people who were there and the celebrities, they're inclined, maybe not for Donald Trump. Again, we'll get to that. They're inclined to laugh. They're inclined to think, isn't this cool that they're spending their Saturday night in black tie laughing at along with the President of the United States. But it's a hard room. It's a sophisticated room. And sometimes the Presidents will veer into humor that really is for the room. They'll make fun of a particular reporter's kind of quirks in a way or a news organization that maybe the general public wouldn't get, but the idea is make that room laugh. It's televised, so you are speaking to a wider audience. But really, again, the rite of passage and the challenge is to in the room kill, again, as the comedians say. Just make everybody laugh. Make everybody say the president took it seriously, wrote jokes. There's been almost no reporting on how Donald Trump is putting this together. He is a little busy now with the war, but I'm super curious to see how he comes in. Now, as I said, Bush and Obama, Bush 43, Barack Obama, they really thought about it. They really thought it was important to do well, and they're both super funny guys. They're both super funny. I want to look at some stuff from the past dinners to give you an idea of some of the moments that I thought were great. The comedians also, historically, have been, some have been very good, some very bad. There's been controversies even before the Trump era about the kind of comedian you get. Do you get a comedian who will mock the president right in front of him? Do you get a comedian who will be disrespectful? Don Imus really mocked Bill Clinton. Some years, the Correspondents' Association picks the comedians who have played it safe. They had Ray Romano one year. His humor is going to be a little soft-pedaled. George Bush, his team, super creative. So one year, they came up with a great idea. Normally, the First Lady comes, she sits on the dais, and she doesn't say a word, literally doesn't say a word, doesn't go to the microphone even perfunctorily. They just sit there on the dais with their husband, and everybody watches to see when their husband's mocked, whether they laugh or not. So one year, the Bush people did a very clever thing, they turned the tables, and they had the First Lady speak. Here's Laura Bush from 2005 at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. This is S2, please.

Speaker 2:
[12:44] George always says he's delighted to come to these press dinners. Bologna. He's usually in bed by now. I'm not kidding. I said to him the other day, George, if you really want to end tyranny in the world, you're going to have to stay up later.

Speaker 1:
[13:16] So First Ladies are not normally known for their comedy schtick, but she killed. And you could see there, if you're watching on the video version here, in the cutaways, she killed. People loved her. People thought, that was really smart. She's always thought of it as the president's secret weapon in terms of advice and popularity. But here she was on this big night, also his secret weapon for comedy. The next year, everybody's wondering, what are the Bush folks gonna cook up? They came up with really one of the most memorable moments in the history of the dinner. It was in the room that night and man, it had people howling. A comedian named Steve Bridges, who did a great George W. Bush imitation and could look like him with a little bit of work, came up and stood side by side, they brought out two podiums, and Steve Bridges stood side by side with George W. Bush, and they kind of did like Bush was himself and Steve Bridges played Bush's kind of alter ego. And so for the second year in a row, they did something novel and the press ate it up. This is 2006 White House Correspondents' Association dinner, George W. Bush and his alter ego played by Steve Bridges. S1, please.

Speaker 3:
[14:27] You know, it's good to see so many influential guests here tonight, Justice Scalia, Justice Alito, yeah, all the usual suspects.

Speaker 4:
[14:39] Speaking of suspects, where's the great white hunter?

Speaker 3:
[14:43] I am sorry, Vice President Cheney couldn't be here tonight. I agree with the press that Dick was a little late reporting that hunting episode down in Texas. In fact, I didn't know a thing about it till I saw him on America's Most Wanted.

Speaker 4:
[15:07] Chaney, what a goofball. Shot the only trial lawyer in the country, who's for me?

Speaker 1:
[15:18] So, for those of you who don't know, Dick Chaney went on a hunting trip and shot a Texas trial order accidentally in the face. The guy lived, thankfully. Anyway, those were fantastic. President Bush did himself a lot of good with the White House establishment and the press corps with those two events and generally his performance at the dinner because he put in the time and they were great. So then come Barack Obama and Barack Obama, like Donald Trump, underrated in terms of comedy chops. He was so good at these dinners and one of the things Barack Obama does in comedy, I call it the Obama double, he'll tell a joke, he'll pause, he'll let it sink in, the audience will laugh and then he'll smile and chuckle silently to himself and it's just such a winning thing. It always produces a second wave of laughter. Every joke practically gets two bites of the apple, two bits of humor and President Obama, I think, found the really sweet spot, the line where you're teasing people, but you're teasing them in a way that the room likes. Just a reality, he would choose targets when he spoke at the Correspondence Center that he knew, at least most of the audience would think, well, that's a good target. One of those is Texas Senator Ted Cruz. Here's Barack Obama in the 2016 dinner, his last as president, talking about Senator Cruz. This is S3, please.

Speaker 5:
[16:53] And then there's Ted Cruz. Ted had a tough week. He went to Indiana. Who's your country? He stood on a basketball court and called the hoop a basketball ring. What else is in his lexicon? Baseball sticks? Football hats? But sure, I'm the foreign one.

Speaker 1:
[17:40] So really, for all eight years, President Obama killed and developed a reputation amongst the people at the dinner in the wider world. Yeah, the guys got comedy chops. Probably the most important White House Correspondents' dinner for Donald Trump to date before this Saturday was 2011, where he went. And I talked to him that night. I had two guests that I was with from Hollywood who really wanted to meet Donald Trump. And they said, could you introduce us? And I had met him basically, I had met him over the years, but our relationship where we had talked started in 2011. And so I was comfortable going over and introducing my friends to him. And he was very gracious to them. As always, when I saw President Trump back then anywhere outside New York, he'd offer me a ride home. Famously, he didn't like spending the night in Washington, so he'd always fly his plane back. I was going to parties, so I politely declined. But he was in a very good mood, I can say, before the dinner. Now, very famously, both Barack Obama and Seth Meyers, the comedian that night, took advantage of the target of Donald Trump, not a character taken super seriously. He had thought about running for president in 2012. I write about that in my book, Double Down, but people didn't take seriously that he might run. He almost ran in 2012. In fact, as I write in the book, the day he announced he was getting out, he turned on Meet the Press and they showed a poll that showed he was the second in the polls, and Mike Huckabee was first and Huckabee had just gotten out of the race as well. Trump said to himself, as we write in GameJ and Double Down, has anyone ever gotten out of the race where they're effectively the front runner? We really did think about running, but he decided to stay with The Apprentice. But that night, he went to the dinner, guest to The Washington Post, and he was ribbed. And those of you who are watching on the video version, you'll see he looks pretty pissed. Now, he's denied that he was pissed, but he looks pretty pissed. And some people say he was so pissed at being mocked for the prospect of running for president, that he decided to run in 2016 and such as history made. In any event, I don't know that we'll ever know the full truth about how that exactly went down. But what we do know is while people get teased at the dinner by the president, by the comedian, this was pretty merciless. And it hit Donald Trump right where one could argue he's most vulnerable. The question of how serious a person he is, how substantive a person. And part of why Barack Obama went after him was because Donald Trump had been the original birther, the original person claiming Barack Obama was not born in the United States, not eligible to run for president. And back then, Barack Obama, like so many Americans, so many Democrats, so many people in that room that night, they didn't take Donald Trump seriously as a presidential candidate. I did. I did in 2011. That's how our relationship started, because he heard me saying on TV that I thought he could run and win, or at least should be taken seriously. So here's Barack Obama in what is perhaps the most famous moment ever at a White House Correspondents' Dinner because of the historical circumstance. Here's Donald Trump in 2011 mocking the man who would become, five years later, his successor, Donald Trump. S4, please.

Speaker 5:
[21:19] Donald Trump is here tonight. I know that he's taken some flak lately, but no one is happier. No one is prouder to put this birth certificate matter to rest than the Donald. And that's because he can finally get back to focusing on the issues that matter. Like, did we fake the moon landing? What really happened in Roswell? And where are Biggie and Tupac?

Speaker 1:
[21:54] You don't need to be a Trump expert to say if you can see his face there in the cutaway if you're watching the video version of Next Up. He didn't look happy. He did not look happy. I've always suspected, and I've talked to President Trump a while ago about this night, I've always suspected based on his reaction that night and just knowing him and talking to him, the Seth Meyers jokes maybe burned him more, maybe steamed him more, because it was not a politician kind of seizing the moment, but a professional comedian choosing to target him and to mock him. Same dinner, 2011. This is Seth Meyers going after Donald Trump. S5, please.

Speaker 6:
[22:32] And then of course there's Donald Trump. Donald Trump has been saying that he will run for president as a Republican, which is surprising since I just assumed he was running as a joke. Donald Trump often appears on Fox, which is ironic, because a fox often appears on Donald Trump's head. Harry Busey said recently that Donald Trump would make a great president. Of course, he said the same thing about an old rusty bird cage he found. Donald Trump owns the Miss USA pageant, which is great for Republicans because it will streamline their search for a vice president.

Speaker 1:
[23:19] Again, the president can deny he was angry, but the look on his face that night was steaming. Of course, he left and went back to New York. Five years later, he'd run for president and make history. Now, he's coming to the dinner again, coming back over a decade later, and he's the entertainment. Rather than have a comedian who might go after President Trump and create an uncomfortableness, the Correspondents' Association is having a mentalist. So there'll be only one comedian, and that'll be Donald Trump. And he is a very funny guy. He also has been known to be pretty rough, and we've seen presidents can be kind of rough. How rough could Donald Trump be on Saturday? Well, here he is from the Al Smith dinner. This is a dinner put on by the Archdiocese of New York, the Cardinals there, a lot of religious figures. Here's Donald Trump in 2024 at the Al Smith dinner. Not quite working blue, ladies and gentlemen, but throwing some elbows. S7, please.

Speaker 7:
[24:26] Chuck Schumer is here looking very glum. He still looks glum. He still looks glum. But look on the bright side, Chuck, considering how woke your party has become. If Kamala loses, you still have a chance to become the first woman president. I don't think Kamala has given up yet. She hasn't. Instead of attending tonight, she's in Michigan receiving communion from Gretchen Whitmer. Unfortunately, Governor Walsh isn't here himself, but don't worry, he'll say that he was. He's going to say he was.

Speaker 1:
[25:09] Now, I won't predict that the president's going to kill on Saturday, but I bet he does because he takes these moments seriously. He's a performer. He's a TV producer. He knows that if he goes in there and doesn't kill, people will talk about it. And he also knows that there's a lot of hostility to him in the room. You've had several hundred former journalists, many of my former ABC News colleagues, including Sam Donaldson, sign a letter saying, you know, the dinner shouldn't even happen because Donald Trump has been so hostile to the press and the First Amendment. But I think the president is going to prepare and I think he's going to come in and he's going to try to be great. But I also know that he's likely to be rough. I've studied the comedy stylings of Donald Trump for a long time and I'm here to tell you, ladies and gentlemen, there are two people. I don't know if it's homage, thievery or coincidence, but there's two legendary entertainers whose comedy stylings are just like Donald Trump's. It's a through line, ladies and gentlemen, from the great Frank Sinatra, Chairman of the Board, through Don Rickles, to the president. I offer you proof positive of where Donald Trump learned to be funny. S9, please.

Speaker 8:
[26:22] What are you all staring at? I can't tell you what I'm drinking, because I will offend somebody. True? I can tell you, it's a bourbon, that's all. It's a bourbon, of course. No, I don't know.

Speaker 6:
[26:41] I'm not going to tell you what it is.

Speaker 8:
[26:45] I'll tell you what it is.

Speaker 9:
[26:47] No.

Speaker 8:
[26:49] Spanish Fly and Ginger Ale. Originally written for the picture, it's a very old song that goes back about 35 years ago. I haven't even born yet.

Speaker 9:
[27:03] You're Chinese, right? Chinese? This girl here? If you're not, get your eyes fixed. I'm looking at a Chinese boy sitting there going, Who's Chinese?

Speaker 1:
[27:11] Who's Chinese?

Speaker 9:
[27:12] Good evening, Mr. President. Nice to see you, sir. And your lovely wife, Nancy. It's a big treat for me to fly all the way from California to be here for this kind of money.

Speaker 7:
[27:26] They say that Bernie, Bernie's probably the best they have. By the way, he's about seven years older than me, more, eight years older. One thing I got to give him credit, he's a lunatic, but he's still pretty sharp. He said, you know, if I didn't debate, I could have gone all the way. He was down 35 points and they decided to replace him. That never, nothing ever happens like what happens to me. It never happens to anybody else. All I got from the United Nations was an escalator that on the way up stopped right in the middle. If the first lady wasn't in great shape, she would have fallen. And then a teleprompter that didn't work. This is, these are the two things I got from the United Nations, a bad escalator and a bad teleprompter.

Speaker 1:
[28:13] So I'll be there Saturday. I'll give you some updates over the weekend. We'll probably talk about this on Tuesday, maybe depending on the war. But I'm so looking forward to it. Been in Washington much of the last two weeks. People are really pumped about it. Corporate America, government, media. I'm looking to see what the protests are like. I bet there are protests both inside and outside the room. I'm looking to see how the president is received and how the cabinet members are received. I'm looking to see how people there for the first time enjoy it. But mostly I'm looking to see if the president rises the occasion. If he matches the comedy excellence, particularly of Barack Obama and George W. Bush. He's well aware of what's on the line. I predict he'll be rough and tough, and I predict he'll have some funny jokes about the media. And I predict he will bring his A-game, or at least try to bring his A-game, because he wants to be known as the greatest of all time. And he's got, as you saw, some pretty stiff competition from some recent presidents, particularly Bush 43 and Barack Obama. Eager to see it. All right, that's my reported monologue on the White House Correspondents' Dinner and Donald Trump's big debut on the big stage that his predecessors have tried at before. Let me know what you think. Let me know if you're looking forward to the dinner. Let me know if you're gonna watch it live. It'll be on C-SPAN and lots of different cable channels. Let me know as you watch it, if you see anybody's tuxes that look particularly good or dresses. Floor is open. Send me your emails. Let me know what you think. Mark, nextuphalperin.gmail.com, nextuphalperin.gmail.com. Head over now to the YouTube channel. If you like to watch the show and all the video, hit subscribe there. Make sure you get all the excellent behind the scenes stuff that I'm gonna shoot this weekend that we'll post there and make sure you go to youtube.com/atnext Up Halperin to take the conversation on the road. You can, of course, listen to us as a podcast, toggle on the downloads, whether you're on Spotify or Apple or anywhere else, to make sure you are the first to see and hear every new report and every new episode as soon as they drop. All right, quick break now. And when we come back, the great Ben Ferguson will be here. He's the host of the Ben Ferguson Podcast, co-host of The Verdict with Ted Cruz. Ben Ferguson is next up. Are you being lied to? They tell you to defer paying your taxes by saving in a 401k or an IRA because then you'll retire in a lower tax bracket. But if that were true, why are so many retirees now in the highest tax bracket of their lives? It's time to get the truth and discover a better way to grow and protect your money. Bank on yourself is the proven retirement plan alternative that banks and Wall Street desperately hope you never hear about. It gives you guaranteed predictable growth that doesn't go backward when the market drops. It can provide tax-free retirement income under current tax law, putting you in control of your future tax rate. You also have control of your money, access it when you need to, no government penalties, no restrictions, and your money keeps growing even when you use it. Right now, get a free report that reveals how you can bank on yourself and enjoy tax-free retirement income, guaranteed growth, and the control of your money. Go to bankonyourself.com/mark and get your free report. That's bankonyourself.com/mark. One more time, write this down, click it in, bankonyourself.com/mark. All right, next up, joining me now, Ben Ferguson, host of a couple shows, The Ben Ferguson Podcast, co-host of The Verdict with Ted Cruz, and not a regular enough guest here, but regular enough that we beg him to come back. Ben, thank you for being here.

Speaker 10:
[32:07] Good to be here.

Speaker 1:
[32:08] First question was, how was Coachella? Tell us all about your time there.

Speaker 10:
[32:12] It was great. I didn't get a ticket, I didn't go, and I didn't have to hang out with Trudeau, so I feel good about all of it actually at this point. I was waiting for Katy Perry and then just hang out, and we could have our plastic straws and plastic cups that he banned and take selfies and throw them online and just be a hypocrite. That sounds like a fun day, right? That's like a good moment if you're a former guy in charge of a country that put all these rules on people, and then you're like, screw it, I'm going to Cotilla and I'll just do it the way I want to.

Speaker 1:
[32:38] If the kids had a sitter and it was all expense paid and you were free, would you want to go?

Speaker 10:
[32:46] It depends on who's playing. I'm a purist on music. If it's a band or someone I want to see, yeah, just to go to go, no. I'd be like, who's playing that night? Unless it was hanging out with a good group of friends, like a birthday or something. Music festivals, I'm like, who's playing? If it's someone I want to see, then let's go, yes.

Speaker 1:
[33:06] All right, I'm going to ask you about events. You tell me, Ben, haven't been, want to go, haven't been, don't want to go. Ready?

Speaker 10:
[33:14] Okay, I'm ready.

Speaker 1:
[33:14] Kentucky Derby.

Speaker 10:
[33:16] I have not ever gotten to go and I'm dying to go. I love horse racing.

Speaker 1:
[33:20] I want to go too. Most years it's the same weekend as the White House Correspondents' Association dinner, so that's messed me up. How about Burning Man?

Speaker 10:
[33:30] Again, depends on who's playing. It's all about who's playing, who's on stage.

Speaker 1:
[33:35] You haven't been?

Speaker 10:
[33:36] No, I've not been. I've never been.

Speaker 1:
[33:37] Okay. A soccer match in Liverpool.

Speaker 10:
[33:41] I do that, yeah, because I'm a sports guy for sure.

Speaker 1:
[33:43] Yeah. You haven't been to Liverpool?

Speaker 10:
[33:45] Never been.

Speaker 1:
[33:46] I recommended to you. I got to do that once.

Speaker 10:
[33:47] Who did you see play?

Speaker 1:
[33:49] I saw Liverpool versus Chelsea.

Speaker 10:
[33:51] Oh, that's like two great teams. Yeah, that's a no-brainer. Was it a tie? Just tell me you didn't get beat down by a tie.

Speaker 1:
[33:56] It was not a tie. Chelsea won, and I've never seen a home team crowd so encouraging of their team in a loss.

Speaker 10:
[34:05] So, you're going to laugh.

Speaker 1:
[34:06] We love you.

Speaker 10:
[34:07] In college, all my roommates were foreign students, basically, and so they were all obsessed with, they call it football, I call it soccer. And they finally got me to go to a big match, and I'm like, okay, I'm going to go, let's go see this thing. And it's a tie game at the end. I was like, this is why I hate soccer. I just came and yelled, I'm exhausted, and no one won. That's the dumbest rule I've ever heard in my entire life.

Speaker 1:
[34:30] The whole world calls it football, but you're so jingoistic, you feel you have to sort of sarcastically say soccer. Do you call them freedom fries still?

Speaker 10:
[34:38] No, as long as they're good and they're well cooked, I'm fine with calling them French fries.

Speaker 1:
[34:42] French fries, okay. Are you going to the White House Correspondents' Dinner?

Speaker 10:
[34:46] I am not, are you going?

Speaker 1:
[34:47] I am going.

Speaker 10:
[34:48] Are you gonna protest? Are you gonna stand up and protest and hang out with the guys on late night TV and my former colleague at CNN who's like, here's my handkerchief? I feel like that could be a really fun moment.

Speaker 1:
[35:01] I'm a little torn. I'm thinking of when the president starts speaking in a very dignified, very classy way, doing a Kaepernick. Going down on one knee. The problem is my tux is pretty tight-fitting because I've gained weight. I think if I do that, it could be calamity.

Speaker 10:
[35:19] So do you think there's going to be a legit moment or some sort of walk out? I got a text this morning from a buddy who's like, dude, there's like now texts going around among DC elites. They're like, we should just do a walk out when he's on stage.

Speaker 1:
[35:31] I mean, I think so. I talked about it in the monologue. I think there are going to be protests of some sort, whether walk outs or turning their backs or I don't know. But I'm sure the president's ready for it. And I just I've always loved the dinner. I've always looked down on people who hate on the dinner. Too clubby, too cozy. I think it's a great opportunity for Washington to do something fun and interesting and to spend time with people in a casual setting. It doesn't mean you have to cover people softly. It doesn't mean you have to endorse Donald Trump. It just means it's a big time for people in Washington to get together.

Speaker 10:
[36:09] See, I actually think this could be a huge moment for Trump to just mock the room if they do act like children and say, here is your non-biased media. I feel like I have a hundred jokes I could write for him. These are the truth tellers of the room who have turned their back. These are the non-biased journalists of the room. Everybody take a picture and just know who is giving me fair coverage when they do reporting. If he's smart on this and the jokes are written the right way, I think he could absolutely kill.

Speaker 1:
[36:38] I agree. I'm hoping for two things. I'm hoping that it's epic and hilarious.

Speaker 10:
[36:43] In other words, now you're making me think maybe I should have gone.

Speaker 1:
[36:46] I'm starting to... Watch on C-Span with a cocktail.

Speaker 10:
[36:49] There you go.

Speaker 1:
[36:50] I like it. I am obsessed as a journalist and as a citizen of the world with this Iran war. I just find all the tactical and strategic questions around it. This week, things haven't moved very much. There have been incremental things. But are you like that? Are you monitoring the situation, as we say, on this in a pretty intense way?

Speaker 10:
[37:13] Yeah, so I've learned more about drilling wells in the Middle East, specifically in Iran. Being in Houston right now, there's a lot of companies that you can reach out to, and I know a lot of guys in the oil and gas business who've been explaining to me, what happens that they are days away from having to actually cap wells in Iran, which is why the president, I think, has continued this ceasefire because they're about to have to make a multi-billion dollar a day decision. I didn't know this, but when they go in, they have no more capacity above ground. They have no more capacity basically of tankers because of the blockade. They're going to have to make a decision within the next several days of starting to cap wells. When you do that, when you try to reopen those wells, you get a lot of water that seeps in and you don't get the production ever again at what you're putting out right now. That will cost them literally billions of dollars or possibly millions of barrels per every couple of days or week depending on how many they have to cap. That is the leverage right now for this White House, which has really not been discussed or talked about I think a lot in the media and publicly, but this is a capacity game now and I think there's a better chance now that Iran comes to the table, even the IRGC, and they get it together with some sort of deal because if they cap a whale here and another one and another one and another one and they try to go back and open those back up, you never for the lifetime of that well get the same output that you had when you capped it. And I didn't know that obviously until I started studying this a lot and asking a ton of questions, but everyone in the oil and gas business that now is saying, this is now the biggest leverage Trump has had if the bombing wasn't enough, right? And clearly there was a certain point where you still have the radicals in Iran that are still saying, no, we refuse. But when you start capping the wells and you're losing the money, like that's a totally different ballgame.

Speaker 1:
[39:09] Yeah. And Scott Besson tweeted about this the other day. And he basically said the clock's ticking. There are some people who say it's days or a week. This to me, I've been saying, this is the big factual question. If what you're saying is right and you're reliant on the experts who say it, if they need the money from oil exports to pay them, the military pay the police state, if they're about to lose this capacity long-term because you can't restore the wells, then the president's kind of checkmated them.

Speaker 10:
[39:39] Yeah. I'm just not sure it's true. And look at their currency right now. It was interesting. I was talking to a guy in the UAE two or three days ago, and he was explaining to me the depth of the well and how far they have to go down. It's very different than the US. In the Permian Basin, for example, where you go down two miles, you go out two miles horizontally, usually to get oil. These wells are very different, and there's a lot of pressure. And so as he was explaining this, he said, Ben, it's really interesting because he's non-political guy, like he's just an analyst in oil. That's what he does for a living, but he said, there is a very interesting paradox, is the way he described it. You have pressure on these wells when you cap them and the pressure with capacity that is now going exactly with the pressure in the political world, and we're seeing them now basically go up at the same rate. And that, I think, is a very interesting perspective that the White House clearly knows that they have. They have an upper hand on it. And so for the president to play, I think, this step back and, hey, we're going to extend this ceasefire, he understands the economics of this, I think, better than anybody else. And if you don't have money coming in Iran, you're going to be out of business at some point in the near future. Look at their currency. They're already limiting, I think yesterday it was like $10 to $12 is what you could take out of a tax, out of a bank account in Iran right now for the citizens there. Like, how long are they going to put up with that?

Speaker 1:
[41:01] The traffic will bear with MAGA and leave aside just the political issues. Just for citizen Ben Ferguson, what has to be in a deal for you to say, yes, Mr. President, strike that deal? What are the must haves for you in any deal with Iran?

Speaker 10:
[41:15] Yeah, for me, and I've been saying this since the very beginning, there are two definitions of success. And for me, it's having Iran not be a nuclear power. Like, that is my definition of success. If we get a deal where their nuclear ambitions are in check, and it's clear, and we're able to stop that, that is my victory. I'm happy to walk away with that. There was a second, I think, tier, and this for me is just a bonus, but not an objective. And that is if there's some sort of regime change. I think immediately you saw the left and the media trying to turn this into Donald Trump is failing, or it's a failure if you don't get the regime change. I fundamentally disagree with that. I said it the first night when the attacks happened. I said, I want to be very clear here. I don't, the regime change would be a bonus. That would be great if it happened organically by the citizens there. All I care about is the national security aspect of it. I don't want to have an endless war. I don't want to have a bunch of troops on the ground. I want to make sure that they're 60% enriched uranium is something they cannot use and turn into a nuclear weapon. But that for me is what I care about in a deal. Outside that, if they want to still be crazy, so be it. But I don't want them having a ton of cash for Hamas and Hezbollah and other terrorist proxies and I want to make sure they never get that nuclear weapon.

Speaker 1:
[42:30] I want to talk to you about your friend, Senator Cruz. We played in the first, in the monologue, Barack Obama making fun of him back when he was president in the Correspondents' Dinner. And as you know, you and I have talked about this, Ted is the subject of a lot of ribbing, a lot of joking, and there's this kind of view of him as unpopular, that his colleagues don't like him, that he's not particularly popular with his constituents. You and I have great respect for him. We think of him as a funny guy, as a great dad, as somebody who is a principled contributor on the National Town Square. Where do you think, and I know I was trying to goad you into talking about this, he may run for president even if JD Vance runs. He's obviously interested in what people think about him. What's your perception? Where is the public's view of Ted Cruz right now? Is it where it was four years ago? Has the podcast changed people's perception? What's your perception of people's perceptions of Ted Cruz right now?

Speaker 10:
[43:27] Well, one, I'll push back a little bit. He's actually very popular in his state of Texas. Way more popular than, for example, the guy that always plays it safe in John Cornyn. John Cornyn's political future is right now a disaster. And so I think the more that people see him and the more the people get to know him, just like you saw him with a big win in the last election here in Texas, with more money than has ever been spent in a Senate election by Democrats to try to beat somebody. There was more money spent against Ted Cruz in his last two election cycles than any other senator in the country, and he still won overwhelmingly in this last election. So he's very popular in Texas. Do I think the podcast has helped? Of course, because I think you get to see a different side of Ted, the side that you've seen in Tennessee 101, the side I get to see of him all the time, the ribbing, the joking, the laughing, the talking about things that are non-political. He's obsessed, for example, with TV series and movies. He loves talking about those types of things. We did an entire episode on that, and those are those humanizing moments. But at the end of the day, Ted Cruz is a constitutional lawyer, a guy that clerked the Supreme Court. He's an insanely smart individual, probably, if not the smartest person I know, one of the top three that I've ever known in my entire life. And I don't think you change that brand. I think you embrace it. Yes, I like to study. I'm really smart. I like talking about world events. But I do think likability is important in a presidential election. I think that he is well aware of that. I think that's part of the reason why the podcast has done so well. It's the top podcast by any politician. It's like 4X the downloads of Gavin Newsom, for example, which Democrats say is the most likable Democrat out there and the front runner for their party right now. So, I certainly think it's helped, but, yeah, he's a serious guy. And I know he's a dork sometimes. I tell him that. I'm like, dude, you're a dork. And he even says you're a jock. And I know that. I'm a Southern SEC, went to Ole Miss guy. You're a Harvard and Yale guy. I love having that back and forth, but I don't want a popular guy being my president. I want a serious guy that understands serious issues. And if I have an issue or a crisis or I wanted someone else's opinion on politics, I ask about it publicly and privately because I value his opinion. And I think that's what he's going to do and bring to the table. Yeah, you need people to like you. Likeability matters. But a lot of it depends on what the issues are going to be of the day. And when you're running for president, it depends on the hand that's being dealt. I use the poker analogy. Every election cycle has different cards that are dealt. Sometimes those cards match up with one candidate more than another candidate. Sometimes it just depends on who was in the White House beforehand. And does that help or hurt you in your situation? But do I think he wants to be president? Look, he's made that clear since he was a little kid. That's been his dream. He ran and lost to Donald Trump. They've worked really well together now. And I do think the issues you're seeing right now are going to change that landscape. I think Rubio, obviously, most would agree, is the front runner now, even above JD Vance. But it's going to be, I think, a wide open primary. It'll be interesting to see what happens in the decision that Senator Cruz makes.

Speaker 1:
[46:26] You said a lot of smart things. Two things you said I need to correct. First of all, you misspoke. You said Harvard and Yale. It's Harvard and Princeton.

Speaker 10:
[46:32] Harvard and Princeton. That'll bother him for weeks now.

Speaker 1:
[46:34] Oh, I know.

Speaker 10:
[46:35] So good. Let's leave that in there.

Speaker 1:
[46:36] It'll bother all my friends from Yale, too. And then the other is, there's no way Marco Rubio is the front runner. There's just no way.

Speaker 10:
[46:43] You don't, see, I disagree. I think everywhere I go and I talk to conservatives, I'm talking about in a primary, they're really liking Marco Rubio.

Speaker 1:
[46:51] Oh, everybody wants it to be Marco Rubio. But if Vance wants it, Rubio will stand down.

Speaker 10:
[46:56] No, I think they'll run against each other.

Speaker 1:
[46:58] No, not in a million years.

Speaker 10:
[47:00] Okay. All right. Hold on. We need a little side bet here on this one. We need a dinner, a side bet or something. I think they'll both run.

Speaker 1:
[47:07] No, if Vance runs, Trump will endorse him and that'll be that. Rubio is not stupid enough to run against the guy with Trump's endorsement. That's what I think.

Speaker 10:
[47:16] All right. That's interesting. I'm intrigued.

Speaker 1:
[47:20] The thing that would humanize Ted Cruz more, you can tell him this, he should talk more about it when I kicked his ass in football. I think that's humanizing.

Speaker 10:
[47:28] I need the story. Give me the story on this.

Speaker 1:
[47:31] Oh, we were just at a, I've covered his presidential campaign and we were at some bar in like Buffalo, New York or something and there was a foosball table and he was foolish enough to say, yeah, let's play.

Speaker 10:
[47:41] And so you know that somebody, if I'm not mistaken, somebody gave him a foosball table that's somewhere on Capitol Hill.

Speaker 1:
[47:49] Really?

Speaker 10:
[47:49] He's obsessed with foosball. Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[47:51] Well, he's obsessed but he's also just, you know, a bit of a girly man when it comes to foosball.

Speaker 10:
[47:56] Hold on, this is good intel for me. So this is going to make it in the podcast.

Speaker 1:
[47:59] I got pictures, there's video, but I'm not sure I can find the video, but I'll send you the pictures.

Speaker 10:
[48:04] So what was this? Was it a beat down or was it close? Like was it a throw down?

Speaker 1:
[48:08] I mean, it was unambiguous who won. I can't remember the score. I didn't win 10-0.

Speaker 10:
[48:13] Okay, all right.

Speaker 1:
[48:14] He lost and it was his body. He was playing with his body guy who will probably blame because all senators throw staff under the bus. That's just part of being a senator.

Speaker 10:
[48:22] Well, I'm trying to think who the body guy was back then. It was Bruce. He does second sports. So yeah, that would actually check out.

Speaker 1:
[48:27] Yeah, it could be. What's going on with the other Texas senator? You mentioned Senator Cornyn. For a while, it looked like President Trump was about to endorse him in his runoff against Paxton. And it's all gone kind of quiet. Primary is not that far away. And the two of them are, they've not gone full at each other yet in terms of paid media, but that's coming. Do you think the president's going to endorse in the race or not?

Speaker 10:
[48:49] Look, I think the president made a really smart move. I was told he was about to endorse Cornyn after the first, you know, the primary that had a larger field in it, and then it was going to go to a runoff. Cornyn, and I went on TV and made this appeal to the president directly. And I said, look, Cornyn did not win an election last night. He bought an election. He spent like $120 or $130 per vote he received in the primary. And that's not winning, that's buying an election. You compare that to Ken Paxton. Ken Paxton spent about three, I think it was $3 or $2, if I remember correctly, it was about $4.5 million on the primary run and was able to win those votes. You're not buying them. So if one guy's paying $120 a vote, the other guy's $2, $3 a vote, which one has real momentum behind them and the people actually won? And so there was this Washington insider obsession and people were chirping the president's ear going, Ken Paxton can't win, Ken Paxton can't win, Ken Paxton can't win. Like dude, he just won last night against a sitting senator who had unlimited funds coming in from outside the state of Texas, who couldn't even get to 50% and is now in a runoff and had to buy those votes by just throwing everything he could out there at Ken Paxton. And then there was the second argument that was made, and I had this debate in Washington, DC among the quote experts, they're like, well, Ken Paxton's got baggage. I'm like, did you not see the commercials? Like every commercial was about the quote baggage. It's now white noise moving into a general.

Speaker 1:
[50:19] All right, so is the president going to endorse or not?

Speaker 10:
[50:22] I don't think so. I think he's waited this long. My gut is he's probably just going to let them do their thing. The president's smart. Look, Cornyn has put a lot of pressure on the president to endorse him. That's very clear. I would be begging the president to endorse me if I was him. He's done that, and the president hasn't done it yet. I think he's going to stick out of it.

Speaker 1:
[50:40] What are Paxton's chances of winning the runoff if there's no endorsement?

Speaker 10:
[50:43] I think he wins at Handley. Yeah, and he's held his money back. He's got a lot of money in there. He's ran a very disciplined old school campaign. That's why he didn't only have to spend about 5 million in the first. I think he will win overwhelmingly. No one really likes in the Republican movement, and I'm not even talking about the MAGA. Take them out of it. I'm saying like that. If you count MAGA at 30 percent in Texas, the other 20 percent of Republicans that don't say they're hardcore MAGA guys, they're not excited about Cornyn either. The SAVE Act, he was holding it up for goodness sakes. There's issues like that where people are just ready for him to go home.

Speaker 1:
[51:20] How many podcasts are you doing a week? How many episodes?

Speaker 10:
[51:22] I do mine six a week. I do Ted's three, and then I do the 47 morning update six a week as well. So 12, 13, 15 podcasts a week.

Speaker 1:
[51:31] Fifteen podcasts. Does that seem like enough?

Speaker 10:
[51:33] I feel good about it right now. I feel like I'm at the right level. I got a caddy for the boys on the weekends, the golf tournament.

Speaker 1:
[51:41] I'm only doing 12, but I'm about to add a couple. And basically now I just want to keep up with you. I want to do one more a week than you do. That's my goal. Ben Ferguson, a busy man with lots of podcasts, family responsibilities, and loves to great outdoors. The host of the Ben Ferguson Podcast, co-host of the Vertica Take Groups, both available on YouTube and wherever you get your finer podcasts. Not your junky ones, but your finer ones. Ben, thank you. Great to see you, my friend. Good to see you. All right, quick break. Next up, we're going to talk more about Iran with Dr. Walid Phares. He's the author of the book Iran, An Imperialist Republic and US. Policy, Longtime Foreign Policy Hand, advising many people. He's up next. Stay with us. Did you know that high blood pressure, it's the number one risk factor for mortality? One in two adults has it. That means there's a 50-50 chance you are a walking time bomb. But here's the good news. You can take control of your blood pressure naturally without having to rely on big pharma. 120 Life is a blend of great tasting super fruit juices that have been shown to help lower blood pressure. It's backed by hundreds of doctors and trusted by thousands of people who've already seen measurable results. And here's the best part, it's completely risk-free. Try 120 Life for two weeks, and if you do not see a difference in your numbers, you get your money back. Go to 120life.com, that's 120life.com, and use the code NextUp to save 20% and get free shipping. This is serious, this is your life we're talking about, 120 Life in Elk. Welcome back, Next Up and joining me now, expert on Iran and the Middle East, Dr. Walid Phares. He's the author of Iran and Imperialist Republican US Policy, a great new book and long time policy advisor to many people in public life, including Donald Trump and Mitt Romney and a Newsmax foreign policy analyst. Dr. Welcome here. Thank you.

Speaker 11:
[53:43] Thank you for having me today.

Speaker 1:
[53:46] What has surprised you so far? You could list one thing or 20. What has surprised you so far in the back and forth between the United States and Iran since the negotiations failed in Islamabad?

Speaker 11:
[53:59] Well, two things. Number one, we are almost sure of the intentions, the strategic intentions of the Islamic Regime in Iran, which is they are buying time, they are gaining time. That's number one. I didn't know, or I didn't project that there will be that long of a time that they can sustain by doing their tactics actually in Islamabad, before and after Islamabad. But more important to me in my reading is the absence of the connection between the US and the Iranian opposition. One would think that that should be at least number two after the military operations, that there would be a visible image of Iranian leaders, Iranian opposition leaders. Inside it's very difficult, at least outside for the time being, as was the case, for example, with General de Gaulle, or with many other exiled leaders who were very visible with the leadership of their allies. That these were the two surprises.

Speaker 1:
[54:54] Right now, there seems to be a big debate in foreign policy circles and within the administration here in the United States about what will put pressure on Iran. Is it economic pressure? Is it military pressure? Or are attempts to pressure them doomed to backfire because the Iranian regime will not react well to pressure? What is your view of how to get Iran, not just to the negotiating table, but get them there for real and get them willing and able to make a deal that would be in the interest of the United States, Israel and the rest of the region?

Speaker 11:
[55:24] We are far beyond the line because remember, the US and allies, Israel in this case, have eliminated a large number of their leaders. The reaction of their base, meaning the regime's base to that, is not going to be, okay, you kill these leaders, next day we're going to meet and get to a deal. So we have that aspect to pay attention to. Aspect number two is that you're going to imagine that what the US has done in Israel was to land in Normandy, broke that wall, the Atlantic wall, and then started negotiations. You start negotiations probably a little bit farther, not at the edge of where you allowed. So now the pressure is on us in the West, in the United States, in Israel, to give the leadership of the Islamic regime whatever they need to accept. So they feel that they are in a position of strength. Though they have lost air force, Navy, ballistic missiles, half of their leadership or even more. But they feel that their enemy, which is us, is willing to negotiate with them. That basically gives them their reassurances that they can win it, if only they can buy time. That is connecting a little bit with our politics, because their analysis, which most likely they received it from American intellectuals or consultants, is that all you have to do is to wait a few more months. The country, the United States, is going to be going into deep trouble because of politics, because of other matters, because of an opposition to the war right here. So all you have to do is just hold where you are and do not sign any agreement so far. That's the position, in my view, of the Iranian regime.

Speaker 1:
[57:05] So your view is shared by many smart people. Are they impervious to any pressure, economic or military, at this point?

Speaker 11:
[57:13] If the US has the time, the blockade by itself is destructive to their economy, the sheer blockade. Another element which is discussed in military circles is to take away from the regime what would basically stop their attempts to shut down the whole Persian Gulf activity, water activity, which is the following, that the United States will, without landing on continental Iran, seize the Kharg Island and three islands also close from the passage. If that is done, their capabilities of altering anything that's happening in the Gulf would be more difficult and therefore economic pressure, blockade plus seizing the islands. But the third one, which at the end is the outcome, is to work with the Iranian people. Probably in our strategy now, we put the Iranian people number three. I would have recommended it should be number one or two at this point.

Speaker 1:
[58:09] What did you write about in your book that you would hope President Trump and the foreign policy team around him would have learned from to figure out how to prosecute this conflict?

Speaker 11:
[58:21] Number one, and that's a good question because they would clarify the changing in our strategy because we learn from what's happening. Number one, creating a wider coalition, like a wider coalition from Arab states who in secret tell the President or the White House, okay, we are with you, you need to continue so on and so forth. But we need them to be public. We need the Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, all these Arab countries involved in that problem to be with us in public. There are other countries around the world, not many, but that could form a coalition that would help us politically. They don't need to be part of it like Argentina sent a destroyer. That's symbolic, but at least Argentina and Latin America and other countries have done so. Also, more activity with opposition movements or legislatures around the world. The regime needs to understand and to see that it's not just the United States, that's not just the Trump administration. It's really representative of the interest of America, although there is an opposition, very serious opposition, but in general terms so far, at least till November, that is America. Then in addition to Israel, a lot of other members and presidents, prime ministers or at least the lawmakers.

Speaker 1:
[59:37] From where we are today, tell me your best case scenario for the world and tell me your worst case scenario.

Speaker 11:
[59:42] Worst case scenario, we don't go in. Worst case scenario, we maintain our presence without significant pressures. Worst case scenario, if we do not link up with the Iranian public. Best case scenario, what I mentioned earlier, modified if possible, which is we do a move inside the Gulf. Because from where we are right now, locating and bombing is fine. It's a lot of pressure. But take in territory, not the landmass, not the continental Iran, but those islands, better even if we can bring free fighters, Iranians who are basically the representatives of an Iranian resistance to the islands and even better to arm the Iranian people. I know these are scary words, but we are on a bridge. We cannot go backward. We can only go forward if we want to win this round.

Speaker 1:
[60:33] President talked a few days ago, maybe a week now, maybe even two weeks. It's hard to keep track. He talked about an effort. First, he mentioned it to Fox News and then he talked a little bit about it to the rest of the media of giving weapons of some sort to the Kurds and seemed to say that the Kurds did not pass them on. What's the proper way to help the Iranian people militarily, to help them organize, to help them become a force that could topple the regime? What are the steps that could be taken to do that?

Speaker 11:
[61:05] I'll start with my conclusion immediately. Short of this, we could bomb the regime forever. We could do blockades, etc. These are important tools to allow the Iranian people to advance and free their country. Those tools are not going to get us to an excellent relationship with the regime. The regime ideologically does not like the United States. This president, a future president, that's not going to happen because of their ideology. With regard to Kurds, there were a lot of stories. I am not sure what is the real story. It's possible that weapons would have been reaching them from Kurdistan, from Iraqi Kurdistan. It is possible that they were delayed. It is also possible that there are factions, five factions there. Some faction didn't want to send the weapons to the other side. Anyway, whatever it is, it's unescapable. It needs to have a command of its own. We have CENTCOM. We have many cons in control. There needs to be one special envoy to the leadership of the opposition that are many oppositions. There is a lot of crafting, a lot of engineering. That's what I said in the beginning of the interview that are not there yet. And it's not just the Kurds. There are at least three or four major fighting groups inside Iran that are significant. The Kurds are one, the Baluch in the southeast, and they have a coast. The Arabs of Iran, Arabistan or Khuzestan, they have multiple names, Ahwaz if you want. They are already armed, but individual arms. So those minority, ethnic minority plus on top of it, the actual majority of Persians who lost 50,000 people. And losing 50,000 people will affect at least 30,000 or maybe, I mean, 300,000 if not more. So the intention of the Iranian people to do, to take action is there and it's very deep, very strong, never had that level, but they want to see two things at least. Number one, that they are being taken care of in terms of sending them arms and training them, which is a problem. And second, they want to see that the Trump administration backed by Congress, bipartisan if possible, will actually identify a transitional government because so far, even if you want to disseminate weapons, they need to be a local government or the arms government. People need to see like during World War II, I keep going back that example. De Gaulle in Britain, he was under Churchill. He was recognized though, his forces, French Free Forces in Britain were trained and around the colonies as well. So what is missing, I would say, but could be a good move if the administration decides so, is to engage the Iranian opposition at all levels.

Speaker 1:
[63:43] Have you ever been to Iran?

Speaker 11:
[63:45] No, I have not.

Speaker 1:
[63:46] Would you like to go?

Speaker 11:
[63:47] I would love to go. There are certain areas. I have so many friends, so many friends who are Iranians. It's almost as if I flew over Iran, but not been to.

Speaker 1:
[63:56] Tell us, who did you write the book for? Who's your intended audience for your book?

Speaker 11:
[64:00] The American public, mostly the students on campuses who are studying political science, regional science, Middle East studies, and of course government. My book was read, at least the first book before that was called Future Jihad, that actually diagnosed what's happening with this jihadist movement, not just in Iran, around the world, and it had great success. This one was published just before this recent revolution that started after Masa Amini.

Speaker 1:
[64:28] It's an important book and it couldn't be a better time for the world to understand every bit of things we need to know to deal with the conflict. Doctor, thank you for being here. Very grateful to you.

Speaker 11:
[64:39] Thank you for having me.

Speaker 1:
[64:41] All right, that's it for today's program. We'll be back on Tuesday with a brand new episode. I'll be fresh out of the White House Correspondents' Dinner, I'll tell you what I know. Grateful to our two guests, Ben Ferguson and Dr. Phares, for spending time with us. Grateful to you for being an extra and part of the program. Whether you're going to the Correspondents' Dinner or not, have a great weekend. Don't forget, as always, to subscribe to the program on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts so you always know what's coming next up.