0:07

Joining me today is a former

0:09

CIA officer, security expert, and host

0:11

of the president's daily brief podcast,

0:14

Mike Baker. Finally, welcome to

0:16

Urban Report. Thank you very much, Dan. Appreciate

0:18

it. I'm glad to have you for a couple

0:20

reasons. I see you on Rogan. I see you on Gutfeld, all

0:22

the usual places. Podcast is great, but

0:24

you're kind of doing me a favor by

0:26

being here today too, because I've been doing

0:28

a lot of racehorse politics, a lot of

0:31

primary, who's going to win, battle it out,

0:33

all of that stuff. And I'm actually really

0:35

looking forward to taking a little bit of

0:37

a break from that and talking mostly about war. Yeah.

0:40

Oh, good. We'll lighten it up a

0:42

little bit. The several impending wars that are going

0:44

on. That's right. The world's on fire, so let's

0:47

cheer people up. Can you tell people

0:49

just briefly before we dive into all that? And

0:51

I normally don't even keep notes in front of me, but I was

0:54

like, there's a lot of places on this planet that are aflame right

0:56

now, and I want to make sure we don't miss any of them.

0:58

Yeah, that's exactly right. But before we get to any of that, can you

1:00

just give people a little more of your background for someone that may not

1:02

know who you are and then we'll dive in? Sure.

1:06

I was with the agency,

1:09

the CIA, for about

1:11

20 years, going on 20 years, and I was

1:14

in what they call the Directorate of Operations.

1:16

So the agency has broken up into different

1:18

segments. You have operations, you have the

1:20

Directorate of Intelligence. They change the names

1:23

occasionally, but basically it's always the same

1:25

four groups. And the

1:27

Intel Director, that's where all the smart people are, and

1:29

they write the reports. They take all the intelligence, they

1:31

take everything that's coming in, and you have the really

1:33

smart writers, the analysts, all those people. And

1:35

then they have an

1:38

admin, essentially, section that does all the logistics,

1:40

and they really keep the place running. Because

1:43

it's not like just admin for, say,

1:45

a company that's making widgets. You're

1:48

running Intel operations around the world. So

1:50

it's a bit of a different game. And then there's

1:53

the science and technology group, and they make

1:55

all the amazing gadgets. So think

1:58

about...well. all

2:00

that disappeared on rabbit hole on that one.

2:02

Battery tech. Are you wearing any of those?

2:05

I am, as a matter of fact. I never travel

2:07

without a couple of gadgets. But

2:09

they, you know, everything from spy satellites to

2:11

the U2 program, battery

2:13

technology, if anybody's walking around with a

2:15

defibrillator, right, they can thank the agency

2:18

because they led the way

2:20

in terms of miniaturization, right, because he

2:22

needed small batteries for operational reasons, right.

2:25

But I was in the director of operations and spent

2:27

all my time overseas, which was great. Had

2:31

a wonderful time, got out, started a

2:33

private sector company that does basically

2:36

intelligence and security, risk mitigation. It's

2:39

Portland Square Group. And

2:41

we're now... I think that's probably going pretty well these

2:43

days. It's gone well. Yeah. The way things happen in

2:45

the world. I think, you know, it sounds mercenary, but

2:47

we do well when there's a little bit of chaos.

2:51

And we, most of our work is

2:53

overseas. You know, we do a fair

2:55

amount of the states, the majority is

2:57

overseas. And we've got offices in

2:59

a number of places, great people. It's been

3:01

a wonderful experience because I had no business

3:04

experience at all, none. And so

3:06

when it came time to get out of the agency,

3:08

because I was raising my daughter, I

3:12

had to do something, right. And I didn't really

3:14

have a lot of skills. So

3:16

I thought, well, I'll stay in

3:18

what I know. And it worked out.

3:20

I started it with a wonderful friend of mine

3:23

who came from the British teams. And we

3:25

just got really lucky. And we

3:27

met wonderful people. And we... Best

3:30

thing we did was we hired smart people. And

3:33

then we give them the objective. And

3:35

then we set them on their

3:37

way. And that was... There's

3:41

a few things I learned from the

3:43

agency. And one of them

3:45

was essentially that, right? Bring

3:48

on the best people you can, tell

3:50

them what the mission is, and then

3:52

have the confidence that they're going to get on with

3:54

it. And now if things go south,

3:56

okay, then you got to step in and help out. We've

4:00

done that and then I got involved in some

4:02

TV work and some film work The

4:06

podcast has been great. We just started

4:08

that in September the president's daily brief

4:11

whole new experience I give you a tremendous

4:13

amount of credit It's

4:15

it's not easy. There's a lot of gadgets

4:18

mostly hairspray. Yeah But

4:20

I'm going through an awful lot of glitter and

4:23

lip balm But no, it's

4:25

it's it's an audio podcast right now They

4:27

they're turning it into a into a video

4:29

podcast But it's

4:32

it's a lot of work. So I'd

4:34

you know, I take my hat off to

4:36

you, but it's been fun So

4:38

let me ask you a little bit more about the

4:40

agencies in general because I talked to a

4:42

couple XCA guys Obviously FBI etc And

4:45

I always find it interesting when you when you talk to

4:47

some of these guys who are out in terms of

4:49

how much they Can talk about and how they can take

4:52

the stuff that they learned and apply it to

4:54

either new businesses Or just kind of what's going

4:56

on in the world without without breaking protocol without

4:58

revealing secrets. It's it or how do you how

5:00

do You balance all that stuff? Well, you know

5:03

what? You have to be smart enough

5:05

to know what you're not supposed to say Right and

5:07

then you have to be disciplined enough not to open

5:09

your yap and do that So sources

5:11

and methods you never talk about I've got a

5:13

very good relationship with the agency I think in

5:16

part because they they know I respect them. I

5:18

had a great time, right? I'm not one of

5:20

those people who left and talks bad about right

5:22

because I had I just had a great time

5:25

I was lucky in that sense right and had

5:27

worked for amazing people and worked with people that

5:29

were tremendous and so

5:32

as long as you Understand what

5:34

you are not supposed to say then and

5:38

you find secrecy agreements and those secrecy They

5:40

don't have a shelf life, right? You know,

5:42

it's not as if okay, it's ten years

5:44

on now I can Go

5:46

on TV and you take that. Yeah, so

5:49

you take that to your grave and

5:51

you need to respect that right So

5:55

and the agency they they were very good

5:57

to me right when I left because you

5:59

know Their point was well, don't

6:01

leave, you know at first it was sort of like don't leave

6:03

because what else are you gonna do? I Mean

6:06

look at ya. Yeah, so but I mean they

6:09

met in a kind way, you know And then

6:11

when I did go to leave they said to

6:13

the degree that we can You

6:15

should leave and be able to say that you

6:17

were here, right? And so

6:19

that's a process in itself Mm-hmm, and I

6:22

didn't really realize the value of that at

6:24

the time because I didn't you know, again

6:26

no business experience. So Getting

6:29

out and being able

6:31

to do that that Opens

6:33

some doors that I hadn't really anticipated and

6:36

so that was a very good thing How

6:38

different do you think the agency is

6:41

now the CIA specifically from when you

6:43

were involved because my guess is 20 years

6:45

ago There was a I don't

6:47

want to speak for you But there was probably a

6:49

certain level of trust in the institution that

6:51

now at least from the outside seems seems Let's

6:53

say shaky at best. Yeah. Yeah, there's a lot

6:56

of that And that's a real yeah, that's a

6:58

real problem I'll

7:01

be honest with you when I was in

7:03

the agency for well, you know again

7:06

going on two decades. I Don't

7:08

ever remember having a political discussion We

7:11

never sat in a safe house and you could spend

7:13

a lot of time sitting in a safe house waiting

7:15

for something to pop Right because you know for whatever

7:17

reason, you know, the targets not available or you're waiting

7:19

for headquarters to say. Yeah, let's do it But We

7:23

never had conversations sitting around talking

7:25

politics. It just wasn't a thing

7:27

right and The

7:29

agency itself is is always supposed

7:31

to be a political. I mean, it's human, right? so

7:33

people are gonna have their opinions and that's fine, you

7:35

know, but You know

7:37

you keep it in check, right? and

7:41

So obviously the rub now is that that's not the

7:43

case right both for the agency and the bureau the

7:45

bureau is taking a real kicking yeah, and

7:48

and I think that's a real shame because Everybody

7:51

I know including at the Bureau And

7:54

these are operators right? These are the agents at

7:56

the Bureau. These are the officers at the at

7:58

the CIA They're

8:01

terrific, right? And they're not political and they

8:03

and they just do what they're supposed to

8:05

do And the agency's

8:07

job is very simple, right? You

8:09

protect the interests

8:11

of the national of the

8:14

nation, you know national security concerns and The

8:17

administration tells you what are your priorities? Whichever

8:21

administration is in charge and then you just march on

8:23

and do it. But obviously

8:25

the rub is now it's become a

8:27

political organization. I Would

8:29

argue the same thing that's been argued about

8:32

the Bureau which is that takes place at

8:34

a much higher level right and

8:37

you know the director That's

8:40

a political position essentially appointed by

8:42

the president and Yeah,

8:46

you can get a director who's Who's

8:49

too enamored with politics with too enamored with being at

8:51

the White House to enamored with that You know the

8:53

tightness of that relationship and what it means you

8:56

can get others to who are you know more

8:58

senior but I Can't

9:00

speak for now, but I can speak for

9:02

when I was there Yeah It

9:04

wasn't a pollute organization and you understood that

9:07

because we spent our time in some real

9:09

shitholes overseas, right? And some very difficult environments

9:11

where the tradition was if the government was

9:13

overthrown and they seem to be getting overthrown

9:16

a lot Then next

9:18

thing, you know, they just sweep out the

9:21

military. They'd sweep out the Intel organization Whatever

9:23

the organization they had and they didn't stall

9:25

their buddies their friends those that they knew

9:27

were being rock-solid loyal And

9:29

you see how awful that was and

9:31

what it would mean to the that

9:33

that particular country And so,

9:35

you know, you had a real understanding that

9:38

that was never to happen with the agency

9:40

So yeah, I think we have to

9:42

always be on guard about that. But the best way

9:44

to guard against it Unfortunately

9:47

is to have a very proactive

9:50

and curious and demanding

9:54

Oversight by the Intel committees up

9:57

on Capitol Hill and

9:59

unfortunately I say unfortunately because my

10:02

theory is we really don't send our best

10:04

and brightest to Capitol Hill. Right. So

10:06

there's a couple of prong problem here. Yeah. Sort

10:08

of politics have been injected into the agencies

10:10

and then the oversight committees, obviously, the congressional

10:13

oversight committees, as you said, these are not the best and

10:15

the brightest. Yeah. So

10:18

do you think there's anything that can be done to

10:20

bring some of that trust back? I mean, especially on

10:22

the Republican side now, you're hearing candidates say, you know,

10:24

just blow away the agencies altogether and a whole bunch

10:26

of other stuff. Yeah. What

10:28

would look at like a sort of sane reformation

10:30

as these things have become political? Yeah. Yeah.

10:34

I hear that talk when people say we got to fire them all,

10:36

you know, whether they're talking about the agency, they're talking about the FBI,

10:38

whatever. Yeah. Just shut it down. You

10:40

think, you know, look, okay, you're

10:42

obviously too stupid, right, to represent

10:44

anybody. How did you possibly get up

10:46

on Capitol Hill? No, look, there's some very bright people.

10:48

I know a couple of the

10:51

people on the on the Intel committees

10:53

that are super smart, one of them

10:55

from from Idaho, Senator Risch, right? They're

10:57

some very good people, but

10:59

we also have some morons, right? So I don't want to

11:01

paint them all with the same brush. But

11:05

I think what would a what

11:07

would a logical step be? I

11:12

think one of the things that needs to be done

11:14

is that the after 9-11, they created,

11:18

you know, the DNI position, right?

11:21

And they, they basically collapsed

11:24

everything into one organization from the

11:26

Intel community, right, all the various

11:28

Intel agencies. And

11:30

the CIA director was kind

11:32

of pushed to the side,

11:34

right, in favor of the DNI,

11:36

who then, you know, sort of had that job of

11:39

sitting in the White House more. It's

11:41

important to have a better line

11:43

of communication between the director of

11:45

the agency and the Oval

11:48

Office. Right. You

11:51

know, you can well make the argument that it

11:53

just depends on the president, right, because some presidents

11:55

are better at that relationship. They pay more attention.

11:57

You know, there was always the rub on. And

12:00

on Trump that he didn't read the

12:02

briefings that came in. Others

12:06

read every page, right? It just

12:08

depends on the person. But I guess my

12:10

point is, I think one of the problems

12:13

we've got is we don't have a better

12:15

line of communication between the agency directly and

12:17

the Oval Office. It's too important an organization,

12:20

particularly in today's times, to

12:22

relegate it to just a member of

12:24

the intel community. Otherwise

12:27

I think you've got to have better

12:29

vetting of the senior

12:32

leadership in terms of

12:36

when they're appointed and that is the job

12:38

of the intel committees, the congress and senate.

12:42

And then, like I said, once you get below

12:44

that senior level, people are just doing their

12:46

job. They're honest to

12:49

God, don't give a shit who's in charge

12:52

on the professional level. Just tell us what

12:54

the hell the mission is. Do you have

12:56

any sense of how much DEI has infected

12:58

that level? The level that you're saying is

13:00

pretty solid? Because I guess that would be

13:02

the level that would get hit the hardest.

13:04

It's been hit, yes. And

13:07

it's there, right? They've

13:10

done what everybody else has done, right? They've

13:12

played the game of DEI

13:15

and I've seen a couple

13:17

of the recruiting ads that they've run. Look,

13:23

the agency was an old boy network, right?

13:25

The original days after World War II,

13:27

it was very much like a yale operation,

13:30

right? Ivy leagues and somebody get a tap

13:32

on the shoulder and then be recruited and

13:34

yes, you've got a very homogenous looking group.

13:39

But from an operational perspective, you

13:42

want a real mix, right? So

13:44

rather than being told that we're doing

13:46

this because it makes the world

13:49

a better place from a DEI perspective, I'd

13:51

rather see the director, instruct everyone saying, we

13:53

operate all around the globe and we better

13:55

blend in, right? In this case, there are

13:58

reasons why people are doing this. in

14:00

different colors. You're off in different languages.

14:02

Exactly. Exactly. It's a

14:04

perfect...you don't have to play the DEI

14:06

game because you need to have that

14:09

operational diversity. And

14:12

to me, having an equity

14:15

officer or a DEI director

14:17

or whatever is just

14:19

bullshit. It's nonsense, right? Just do your

14:21

job, which is get out there and

14:24

hire the best and brightest to operate

14:26

around the globe, right? And

14:28

yeah, I don't know. You raise an interesting

14:31

point with that. Let's

14:33

shift to some of the fires in

14:35

the world right now. There are many

14:37

fires, but as we sit here right

14:39

now, just I think about two hours

14:41

ago, the Biden administration has reinstated the

14:43

Houthis as a terrorist organization. They

14:46

were a terrorist organization under Trump. Biden,

14:49

one of the first things he came in and did

14:51

was undo that. Now we got

14:53

a big problem. Can you explain who the Houthis? Give me

14:55

like Houthi 101. What's going

14:57

on again? Can you clean that up for

14:59

the average person that's just watching another fire

15:01

in the world and going, why

15:03

should I care? Why does this matter? So

15:07

the Houthis... We

15:09

see the dancing videos. They've got a great choreographer. Oh my

15:11

God. Get the guys out there with the music. And I

15:13

tell you what, you want to... Sanaa,

15:15

the capital of Yemen, is

15:17

a fascinating place. It's

15:20

very interesting. It's an interesting culture. It's

15:23

really...and that's the thing. You

15:25

look at it and go, okay, well, you guys are pretty fucked up, but

15:27

it's a fascinating place. Great history,

15:29

great culture. Let's get this under control. But

15:32

they basically have had a civil war in

15:34

Yemen raging for quite some time. And

15:36

I don't want to oversimplify this, but

15:39

a lot of the violence, a

15:42

lot of the death, a lot of the instability in

15:44

that region, if you say, well, what the hell is going

15:46

on? It's essentially a

15:48

Sunni Shia problem, right? So the Saudis,

15:50

Sunni, Iran, Shia, right? If

15:58

you know nothing else about it, then just... You

16:00

kind of say, okay, yeah, you got two teams

16:02

and they're going at each other in terms of

16:05

their belief systems. Iran

16:08

has been supporting the Houthis. They

16:10

find it in their best

16:13

interest. Iran is... People say this all

16:15

the time. People say Iran is the state sponsor,

16:17

the largest state sponsor of terrorism. What does that

16:19

mean? It means that they have built

16:21

up proxies in

16:25

the Middle East. In part

16:29

to satisfy one

16:31

of their primary objectives, which

16:33

is to destroy Israel. So they

16:36

have built essentially and sponsored

16:38

and funded and trained and

16:40

resourced Hezbollah up in Lebanon,

16:43

Hamas, Palestinian

16:46

Islamic Jihad and

16:49

the Houthis in Yemen. I'll

16:51

stick with those three for now, but they're

16:54

all creations essentially of

16:56

Iran. If

17:00

Iran didn't provide them with support

17:02

and funding and guidance and training

17:04

and missiles and weapons, we

17:08

wouldn't be talking about this today because Hamas

17:10

wouldn't be anywhere near where it is. But

17:13

they do Iran's bidding in a sense. I'm

17:16

oversimplifying a little bit. They've got their own

17:18

interests as well, but that's where

17:20

they take their guidance from for the most

17:22

part. So you've got the Houthis sitting in

17:24

Yemen. They

17:27

claim that they've started this latest

17:30

issue, this rocketing of commercial and

17:32

now US Navy warships in the

17:35

Red Sea, in

17:37

sympathy and support of Hamas and

17:40

against Israel. It's

17:44

not as if the Houthis sat

17:46

there to themselves. They're in a

17:48

very tenuous ceasefire right now and

17:50

their conflict with the... They

17:53

don't control. They're not recognized as the government

17:55

of Yemen. The

17:57

government, the recognized government of Yemen is...

18:00

supported by the Saudis. The

18:03

Houthis supported by the Iranians. But there's a

18:05

very tenuous ceasefire there that exists. It's not

18:07

as if the Houthis would have said to

18:09

themselves on their own without Iranian encouragement and

18:12

guidance, you know what we should do? We

18:14

should take some of these Iranian-provided missiles

18:16

and anti-ship missiles and start blasting them

18:18

out and really disrupting global trade. That

18:21

Red Sea Channel, that

18:23

accounts for 15%, 17%

18:26

of global shipping traffic. Most

18:30

major shipping lines, Marist, Capagloid,

18:34

and most major companies, Shell,

18:37

BP, others, just shut down their

18:39

operations. They're rerouting all their traffic

18:42

around the Cape of Good Hope. So

18:45

that adds extra days, adds about nine

18:47

days depending on the routes we're talking

18:49

about. That's fuel costs, that's crew costs,

18:51

that's shipping, that's everything that gets into

18:53

that. Everything starts

18:55

to become a problem. And

18:58

so the Houthis, it's not like they did this on

19:00

their own. What

19:06

our problem is from

19:08

a US perspective and our allies' perspective

19:10

is that the

19:13

Biden administration currently won't

19:17

address the primary

19:19

driver of all this, which is Iran. So

19:21

the Iranians made the calculation, the regime, not

19:24

the people, but the history of Iran is

19:26

fantastic. And the people are great,

19:28

but it's the regime and

19:30

the IRGC, the Revolutionary Guard Corps, they

19:33

know, because they've been doing

19:35

this for a long time, that they can

19:38

continue to destabilize the region and

19:41

they're not going to be paying for it

19:43

directly. Any response is

19:45

going to be directed at one of

19:47

their proxies. So that

19:49

was a calculation they made. The Biden

19:52

administration is playing that out for sure.

19:55

Early on in the conflict, they didn't want to talk

19:57

about Iran. And now they've at least mentioned

19:59

it. obliquely. This

20:02

designation that you

20:04

raise is interesting because President Trump did

20:06

designate them as a foreign terrorist organization.

20:08

You've got different levels of designation, right?

20:12

When you say, okay, that group, Hamas, or that group

20:14

over there, we want to

20:16

designate them as terrorists. You

20:18

can do that at various levels, and it has

20:20

different impacts in terms of what actions can then

20:22

be taken against the group. So

20:25

the Trump administration listed Houthis as a

20:28

foreign terrorist organization, and then Trump

20:31

in February of 21, or sorry,

20:34

Biden when he came in, so it was February of 2021,

20:36

reversed that

20:38

decision. And he reversed

20:40

it because the UN and

20:42

others were saying, oh, this is terrible.

20:45

You can't keep them on the terrorist list because

20:47

it's hurting Yemen. It's hurting the

20:49

people of Yemen. And they're

20:51

not getting humanitarian aid. Well,

20:54

most of that humanitarian aid was getting

20:56

rifled by the Houthis anyway.

20:58

Right. They found exactly like what's

21:01

happened with Hamas and with Hezbollah.

21:03

Exactly. That's exactly right. Hamas, the

21:05

leadership is rich because of

21:07

all the billions that they control when

21:09

money and aid goes into Gaza. Right?

21:12

So anyway, but with the Houthis, the

21:15

Biden administration had no choice, I think,

21:17

from anopic for politics. They

21:21

realized, okay, we now have

21:23

to reverse our own decision. So

21:26

now they've... Oh, you mean they

21:28

had no choice now. Then... Yes. Do you think

21:30

then the idea was, well, Trump did it, so

21:32

we're just going to reverse it? Oh, yeah. Like

21:34

everything else. Yeah. Yeah. I think like everything else.

21:36

The border decisions that they took on the border

21:38

is ridiculous. But it was that

21:40

idea that if Trump did it, it must have been

21:42

bad. And so let's just change

21:44

it all because that'll show how righteous we are. So

21:47

they did that with the Houthis. And

21:52

now, now they've decided to go and

21:54

reverse their thinking because they have no

21:56

choice. Right? I mean, the news,

21:58

the media has finally picked up on it. on this and

22:00

said, okay, there's a lot going on here and

22:02

we're being targeted. It's only

22:04

a matter of time before something

22:06

bad happens. And then, so I think they

22:08

wanted to get ahead of it a little

22:10

bit, right? And so

22:13

what they've done is they haven't

22:16

gone with the Foreign Terrorist Organization

22:18

designation. They went with a lesser

22:20

designation, which is the especially designated

22:23

global terrorist, right? So whatever that is,

22:25

that's an acronym. I'm sure it's a

22:27

government acronym, SGDT. So

22:31

that is

22:33

still important. No, don't get me wrong. I'm

22:36

glad they did it, but it's

22:39

not the strongest that they could, the

22:42

action that they could take against the Houthis. So

22:44

what they've done here is they're saying, okay, we're

22:46

gonna designate you as terrorists. Yeah,

22:49

we're gonna call you terrorists. And

22:51

that can allow us to freeze assets to

22:54

a degree, but it still allows for

22:56

humanitarian aid to go in. Again,

22:59

the problem is if it goes into Haudair, if

23:01

it goes into the port, main port there in

23:03

Yemen, that's

23:05

controlled by the Houthis.

23:08

So humanitarian aid, whether

23:10

it gets to the actual people who deserve it

23:12

and need it, et cetera, just like with the

23:14

citizens of Gaza, yeah,

23:17

is anybody's guess. How much of this, of

23:19

the craziness that we're seeing right now, whether

23:22

it's in Gaza or whether it's in Yemen, and

23:24

what's going on with the Red Sea and everything,

23:26

is connected back to the $6

23:28

billion. That just, a couple weeks

23:30

before October 7th, they were

23:32

saying, oh, well, it's fungible. Who knows

23:35

what they're gonna do with it? After they had

23:37

originally said, no, we can't go to certain things.

23:39

And then suddenly it was like, oh, we gave

23:41

them the cash. Well, we'll see. Yeah, yeah, don't

23:43

know. Yeah, we can't keep track

23:45

of our own money here. I'm sure we

23:47

can watch him, money going out of, flowing

23:49

out of Qatar for the Iranians. Yeah,

23:53

you know what? I think it was

23:56

definitely the wrong move. It was a stupid move. It

23:58

was misguided on their part. Did

24:02

it contribute to what's going on now? Not

24:04

really, because the Iranians have

24:06

been making bank off of oil anyway. They've

24:08

been making money. So I'm

24:10

not saying that the $6 billion wasn't important, because

24:13

it was. And

24:15

other additional funds that were going there, that wasn't

24:18

the only tranche of money that went to the

24:20

Iranian regime from the Biden

24:22

administration. But

24:24

they were making money

24:27

anyway, because we haven't

24:29

clamped down on their

24:31

primary source of revenue, which is energy. The

24:33

same with Russia. We've made the

24:35

same mistake with Putin. And

24:38

the Iranians are selling

24:40

to China and Russia.

24:44

So they have buyers. But

24:47

it does point to just

24:50

this misguided foreign policy

24:52

that the Biden administration has had towards

24:54

Iran. And I

24:56

get it. They were doing what

24:58

they believed in. You know, administration comes

25:01

in, they're going to make their own decisions.

25:04

But it

25:08

seems opposite

25:10

of what history has told us. Every

25:12

time the US has extended

25:15

their hand to try to make

25:17

some deal or negotiate or make

25:19

peace with the Iranians, the regime

25:21

smacks it away. And they keep

25:23

on doing what they've been doing. And so I don't

25:26

know why they expected to get some different reaction.

25:29

So what do you think a resolution of this

25:31

looks like? So now we've

25:33

deemed them a terrorist organization on the slightly

25:36

lower designation, but they're most

25:38

likely not going to stop right now. So

25:41

what does the resolution look like to get those ports

25:43

functioning again? That route open? Yeah.

25:48

If Iran told the Houthis to stop, they would stop.

25:52

That's the only channel that's going

25:54

to work with the Houthis. If

25:58

all we do is... fire a few counter

26:00

strikes at Houthi

26:03

stock piles of missiles, et cetera. And most

26:05

of those missiles are mobile anyway, right? So

26:07

we have a hell of a time trying

26:10

to do target identification, create target

26:12

packages that are going to degrade

26:15

their capabilities sufficiently. They did these last counter strikes

26:17

they did over the past couple of days with

26:20

the British as well. And

26:22

there was some other support that came in from other

26:24

allies. These

26:27

are the military way they feel like they may be

26:30

degraded about 25% of their capabilities,

26:32

right? You know, that's

26:34

probably really an aggressive estimate. I doubt

26:36

it's that much. So

26:38

yeah, how do you stop this? How do

26:41

you stop the other instability, right? Look,

26:44

Hamas personnel were in

26:46

Iran training leading up to seven

26:48

October, right? Their

26:51

stockpile of weapons, the stockpile of weapons

26:54

that Hezbollah is sitting on, everything it's

26:57

all emanating from Iran. They all have the

26:59

same, I mean, the Houthis have the same

27:01

goal. They got it on their slogan is

27:03

on their flag, right? Death

27:05

to America, death to Israel, right? That's

27:09

the objective. And so unless

27:12

we have

27:15

an actual deterrence strategy targeting

27:17

Iran, not their proxies, because that's what

27:19

they expect and they've made that calculation

27:21

that they're good with it because

27:24

it's worked for them, then nothing's

27:27

going to change. I suspect you

27:29

don't think that's coming though with the administration. No, no,

27:32

no. And I'm not saying it's a good thing. I'm

27:34

getting nobody wants, look, the

27:36

conflict in Gaza, that's a war that

27:38

Hamas started, right? So the only

27:40

people that wanted that war, right,

27:42

were Hamas and Iran, right? Nobody

27:45

else asked for it. And so

27:49

nobody wants conflict. Nobody

27:51

wants war. Nobody wants

27:53

anybody killed. I mean, it's civilian

27:56

deaths are tragic, but

27:58

we're going to have to do something because So

28:02

if we just continue down this same

28:04

path as far as the regime goes,

28:06

they are shortening that breakout window for

28:08

their nuclear program. And they're

28:10

also at the same time shortening their ability

28:13

or the time it's going to take them to have a

28:15

delivery system that's capable. And

28:18

because you get a nuke, you got to put it on

28:20

something. So you

28:23

can tell I'm a nuclear weapons specialist. That was

28:25

you do have to put it on something. You

28:27

got to put it on something. Everybody's going to

28:29

have to say it in the office. You're not

28:31

going to send it by FedEx. So

28:35

it would be a lot

28:37

easier to deal with the regime now in

28:40

a targeted fashion. And I'm

28:42

not saying we go to war with Iran,

28:45

although if anybody thinks that that war would be

28:48

messy for a while. But we've

28:50

got the ability. And

28:52

look, are the Saudis going to get upset about

28:54

it? Absolutely not. Are they going to come out

28:56

publicly and go, yeah, yeah, no. But

28:59

a number of countries in that region would

29:02

have no problems with Iran,

29:05

the regime, again, getting punched in the nose

29:07

and told, you know, in no uncertain fashion,

29:09

this has got to stop. You

29:12

have got to stop this. This does nothing for

29:14

the community of nations. And

29:17

you know, but again, I don't think that's going to happen. And

29:20

nobody wants that to happen. But

29:22

I don't see any other resolution to this. Let's

29:25

connect that to you mentioned Hamas a couple

29:27

of times. I took my team to Israel

29:29

in May. And my main takeaway of 10

29:31

days there was how peaceful it was, ironically.

29:33

That really was my especially, especially in Jerusalem.

29:36

But when we were up north and we went

29:38

to some of the stations that they have there

29:40

right on the border where you can see Hezbollah,

29:42

literally, you know, 100 yards away, something like that.

29:45

And we went, we started going down the tunnel. The guys started

29:47

yelling at me. They took us into the tunnel. I started walking

29:49

down. The guys like, you can't walk down there, but you can

29:51

see it. What

29:54

was interesting to me is that there seemed to

29:56

be way more concern about what was happening up

29:58

north than there was related. to Gaza. You

30:00

know, there's a problem up north for sure, but

30:03

clearly Gaza was the thing that was about to

30:05

explode. I mean, Israel

30:07

is an obscenely tiny country with

30:09

basically people that want to blow

30:12

them apart every which way. What

30:14

should they be doing right now?

30:16

They've got north Gaza, but there's

30:18

still hostages. I mean, what's the

30:20

same strategy? What gets them out

30:22

of this? Well, yeah,

30:25

first of all, I will say this. I was about

30:27

to say something about Hezbollah, but first of all, I'll

30:30

give a travel promo

30:33

for Lebanon. Lebanon is a fantastic country.

30:35

Beirut is an amazing city, and the

30:37

Lebanese people are incredible, great people. I'm

30:39

not talking about Hezbollah. I'm talking about

30:42

the other. Well, the

30:44

Lebanese people don't love Hezbollah. They're sort of held

30:46

hostage by them. Yes, and you could argue the

30:48

same for a lot of the citizenry in Gaza,

30:51

right? I mean, they understand that they've been

30:53

screwed over by Hamas, right? All that money,

30:55

you know? Think about how many billions of

30:57

dollars and what that could have done for

30:59

the people of Gaza, clean water systems, schools,

31:03

better road infrastructure, communications, all

31:05

these things. But you've

31:07

got these assholes who siphoned

31:09

it all off and

31:12

extorted the people for using the tunnels for

31:14

moving commerce and everything else. I mean, it's

31:16

an astounding thing, and yet it's all Israel's

31:18

fault. Somebody's got to pay the bills for

31:20

the Mandarin Oriental and better. Exactly.

31:23

So, yeah,

31:25

but you're right. The military, the

31:28

IDF for Israel, basically

31:31

is a position now where they feel as

31:33

if they've got northern Gaza under control. So

31:36

they've been withdrawing. They've been

31:38

pulling their people out and equipment.

31:41

They're doing the same thing slowly

31:45

in the south, right? But the south, as

31:47

you pointed out, is more of an issue,

31:49

right? More fighters, some

31:51

leadership still located down there. And

31:55

the one truth here

31:57

and the hostages, yeah, and although a Again, trying

32:00

to get intelligence on where those hostages are located.

32:02

There's been a lot of time this past, right?

32:05

So, the movement of these individuals, right?

32:09

It's heartbreaking, but again,

32:13

there's one group responsible

32:15

for this, right? This is

32:17

not something that Israel asked for. So, they've

32:19

got to deal with it in the best

32:21

sense. And you point out a very... I

32:23

don't think people understand how small Israel is.

32:26

And again, Iran circled them

32:28

with groups that they helped

32:30

build that all

32:32

believe in destroying Israel.

32:35

So, they have circled them with these terrorist

32:37

organizations to accomplish this. Hamas

32:39

was very smart. And

32:43

I suspect the RGC liaison

32:45

was involved in this relatively

32:47

long-term project of disinformation to

32:49

essentially lull the Israeli government

32:51

into this sense of, okay,

32:53

Hamas doesn't want conflict and

32:55

Hamas is good. So

32:58

we're going to open up more in terms of work

33:00

opportunities and allow more free

33:02

flow of citizens from between Gaza

33:04

and Israel for work. And

33:07

that was a very intense covert

33:09

action campaign, right, to do

33:12

that. And I think they

33:14

also realized, once we did that, once we took

33:16

away, at least

33:19

in the minds of some within the Israeli government, this

33:21

idea that Hamas was a daily, everyday threat and

33:23

they wanted conflict and they were looking across, once

33:25

you did that, then that opened up

33:28

the door for the government to kind of look

33:30

inward, right? And then you started getting more infighting

33:32

within the government. I

33:34

think that that encouraged Hamas

33:36

and whoever was guiding the strategy. I

33:39

guarantee you, these rocket scientists didn't come up with it on

33:41

their own. And so, yeah,

33:45

that part of it was

33:47

fascinating. And then when you think about, yeah,

33:52

I don't know, I guess the

33:54

point I'm trying to make there is they

33:58

combined that with... the

34:01

operational side leading up to 7

34:03

October. Again guided and trained by

34:06

the IRGC in Iran and their personnel that

34:08

were based in Gaza and helping out. They

34:13

understood the importance of dumbing this down, right?

34:15

And so people talk about

34:17

what an intelligence failure it was, and

34:19

it was definitely on the Israel part

34:21

of Mossad and IDF and others. But

34:26

in part it was driven by the fact that Hamas

34:28

understood what they had to do leading up to

34:31

this, right? So their communications patterns changed, right? They

34:34

dumbed down there so there was

34:36

less second to pick up or

34:38

potential communications intercept. They had a real

34:40

understanding of where they were going with this. But

34:44

how do you, you know, if they, if

34:49

this conflict ends tomorrow or

34:52

ends a month from now or two months from now

34:55

and Hamas in some form is

34:57

still intact

34:59

and running Gaza, then the

35:01

only winners are Hamas and Iran. And

35:04

the violence will continue and the terrorism will continue and all

35:06

that. So the one key

35:08

truth that Netanyahu said at the beginning was

35:11

we have to destroy Hamas. We have to

35:13

make sure they can never ever do this

35:15

again. That's a tough, you know, tough call

35:17

and it's operationally not feasible in

35:19

the sense you can't wipe them all out.

35:23

But you can try. Well, what would

35:25

you say to people who say there's no military

35:27

solution? That's a big thing you hear in Democrat

35:29

or left-leaning circles. There's no military solution to this

35:31

thing. It's like there's

35:33

always a military solution. It's the most pleasant

35:35

thing in the world. Right. But it's war.

35:38

Yeah, it is. And I would

35:40

say those people that talk about that is no

35:42

military solution. That's a really simplistic concept, right? And

35:45

usually they have no experience in

35:47

a hostile environment. We did

35:49

things in World War II that gave a

35:51

military solution. Yeah. But

35:54

you combine it with other things, right? Just because you're

35:56

focused here doesn't mean you're also not doing

35:58

other things concurrently on different trends. cracks, you

36:00

know, whether it's negotiations, whether it's coming up

36:02

with what does this governance look like when

36:05

we finish with this conflict, they've

36:07

got to get themselves to a point where they feel

36:09

they have degraded Hamash because you're not going to remove

36:11

him entirely, or you're not going to destroy them entirely.

36:14

They've got to get the point where they

36:16

feel they've degraded them sufficiently that they are

36:18

not a factor going forward, right? And

36:21

they also understand because they knew

36:23

going into this, right? They knew

36:27

well before anyone that what the narrative

36:29

was going to be as soon as

36:31

they moved on their operations inside Gaza,

36:33

that the narrative would change to, oh

36:36

my God, Palestinians are dying. Right.

36:39

And look how many are dying. By the way, the

36:41

media never questions the statistics that come from the Hamash

36:43

controlled Ministry of Health. Right. Right.

36:47

Yeah, exactly. We'll take

36:49

that. We'll take that information.

36:51

And so they've got to get

36:53

to that point where they understand that from

36:56

their intelligence and what the targets have been able to

36:58

take out and the leadership they've been able to terminate

37:00

that they've accomplished that.

37:03

But they did understand that the narrative would turn quickly. I

37:06

don't think they expected it to turn as quickly as it did,

37:09

given how brutal the seven October attacks were.

37:13

But it did. And now you have a lot

37:15

of useful idiots out there protesting on their behalf and

37:17

on the Houthis behalf. What do

37:19

you think, just to bring that

37:21

back to the domestic side for a second, then we'll

37:23

move to another part of the world altogether when you

37:26

see all these protests all over the world, but specifically

37:28

in America, when you see these protests and they're protesting

37:30

River to the Sea, all of this stuff we've got,

37:32

you know, they're protesting at the White House, they're pulling

37:34

on the fence, vandalizing all this stuff. Like, are the

37:37

agencies paying attention to that? Like, I think most people

37:39

are watching that going, doesn't even matter what you think

37:41

of what's going on in the Middle East. Mostly we're

37:43

watching that like, didn't we do this a

37:45

couple of years ago? Didn't we burn down our cities

37:47

a couple of years ago? Why is no one ever

37:49

arrested at these things? Are you just allowed if it

37:51

was a bunch of white people showing up at the

37:53

White House with the answer? Yeah, what would be happening?

37:55

So what's going on at the agency? I know it's

37:57

not exactly what the agencies are supposed to be doing.

38:00

protecting the White House, but it's

38:02

intelligence involved, right? Yeah, we have a good example

38:04

of what happens when a bunch of people show

38:07

up and rattle fences and break it. We

38:09

know what happens when they're wearing, you know, MAGA hats. That's

38:12

fine. And they should have been punished, right? But

38:15

at the same time, the

38:18

inconsistency of the way they came down on that

38:20

and then, you know, we

38:22

disappeared on that rabbit hole, but they

38:24

were very smart. I give the Democrats

38:27

very, you know, a lot of credit for being clever

38:29

and sticking to a

38:31

message because early on in that, they

38:34

started using that word insurrection, right? And

38:36

they knew what they were doing, right? They understood

38:38

if we can beat this narrative,

38:41

right? That allows us to then do what

38:43

they're doing now in terms of trying to,

38:45

you know, strike Trump off the ballots. So

38:48

in all your years, did you ever see any other

38:50

insurrection where no one had a set of plans and

38:52

nobody brought weapons? Strolled

38:54

around, took pictures. Yeah. Can

38:56

we just move this barrier out of the way? Yeah. I

38:59

mean, the people that, you know, there had to be

39:01

consequences for the people who were violent. Sure.

39:04

Right. Of course. But,

39:06

you know, at the same time, the Democrats knew what

39:08

they were doing. They played this one up. And then

39:10

people see in general, I don't think it's just Republicans.

39:12

I think it's both sides. Human

39:15

nature, you know, you want to see consistency. You want

39:17

to see the same. So they look and

39:20

they see this and they, whether it's the

39:22

Antifa riots or what took place in front

39:24

of the White House and they go, how is

39:26

this working? Because it seems not consistent in terms

39:28

of the way things get dealt with. But

39:31

yeah, the. Is that connected

39:34

purely to the politics of the agency, the agencies

39:36

that we were talking about earlier? Or

39:38

is that something else? No, I think that's a

39:40

top down thing from the administration. And

39:43

that's a politics thing where they. It's

39:46

not because the the agency has nothing to

39:48

do with that. Right. That's a that's

39:50

a secret service issue. Capital police issue.

39:53

Not not even capital police. Yeah.

39:55

Yeah. They could have a little

39:57

bit of jurisdiction, I suppose. Maybe. Well, I guess I guess

39:59

I'm. Or in terms of information snatching

40:01

on the ground in those groups figuring

40:04

out who's connected to who. Yeah,

40:07

that's a bureau thing. Yeah, that would also be a bureau

40:09

thing. And you're right, they'd

40:11

wanna know who's there. They

40:14

would, but most

40:17

of those people out there couldn't

40:20

find guys on a map, right? I

40:22

mean, and some of them are being bust in.

40:24

They don't even know what they're doing, right? They're

40:26

getting a free t-shirt and a hat, and

40:28

they get to go out. And

40:30

some are there because it makes them feel righteous. And

40:33

they like that, and they get to say,

40:35

yeah, look, and they get to, I

40:38

don't know. And then some are trust

40:40

fund protestors, they're wealthy. People

40:47

talk about, oh, we're all

40:50

divided. We're all everybody, and

40:53

it's become very divisive, and the demographics

40:55

are getting sliced and diced. The

40:58

only group I can't stand are

41:00

privileged progressive. Because

41:03

it's the self-righteousness that drives me

41:05

crazy. And some of that plays

41:07

into these protests. There are,

41:09

you get others who are out there who have been

41:11

worried about this cause for most

41:13

of their lives. So God bless them, right? And

41:16

we have the right to peaceful protest. I'm just

41:18

saying that in these crowds, you

41:21

got a lot of idiots. Sure, I would put

41:23

the pure G-Hottists with the

41:26

righteous progressive moron. I wouldn't

41:28

do that there, kind of. Yeah, well, I mean,

41:30

I mean, G-Hottists, I mean, like, a Palestinian

41:33

descent, right? Who have lived here

41:35

now, and have family over there.

41:38

Okay, yeah, I get that. But

41:40

you look at some of the college campuses, and you think,

41:42

you kids, what the hell are you doing? You're doing this

41:44

because you think it's cool, and it's

41:46

trendy, and you're looking for something to do.

41:49

And by God, you can get out there

41:51

and feel clever. Queers

41:54

for Palestine is very different than Palestine for

41:56

queers. Yes, I think that's how it's...

41:58

You wanna go to the Fari? Now or do you want to

42:01

go to Eastern Europe which way do you? Tends

42:03

which way around the globe you want to choose we should have

42:05

it You know what we can do we could do this monthly

42:07

and you can have like a wheel of spin, right? Wheel

42:09

of shit we may have to

42:11

because none of these problems are going away. All right Why don't

42:13

why don't we go to the far east end because Taiwan just

42:15

had elections? They looked pretty

42:18

legit I mean people were actually holding tickets

42:20

and there were people checking things and it

42:22

all kind of seemed like oh That's how

42:24

it could work in functioning democracies,

42:28

but there's a Big situation going

42:30

on with China, Taiwan Independence

42:33

are they seeing American weakness? Etc.

42:36

Etc. I'm just yeah, no, you're

42:38

right. Yeah, it was a

42:40

tidy election It was a tidy election and they they

42:42

sorted it out and they were able to call it,

42:44

you know Why didn't take a month?

42:47

Yeah, but Yeah,

42:50

the the problem now from

42:52

China's perspective is that the

42:54

wrong party won, right? So they were

42:56

they were pushing and they were basically

42:58

three parties and they were contesting this

43:00

But there were only two that were

43:02

seriously contesting it and one

43:04

was the the Democratic People's

43:07

Party the DPP and the

43:09

other was a Kuomintang party and the

43:13

Kuomintang party is Very

43:16

much in favor of closer relations with China China

43:19

was very much hopeful that they would win

43:21

they didn't the DPP won the

43:23

vice president of the DPP became of

43:25

the government became the president the new president William

43:28

Lai and They've

43:31

been fairly vocal about the importance of

43:33

Taiwan's Independence and now

43:35

it that that word means a little

43:37

something different right when you talk to the Taiwanese people They

43:40

can be pro we want Taiwan

43:43

to be independent and free They

43:46

don't mean you know rattle occasion

43:48

be completely separate, you know from China They

43:50

don't believe in the importance of that relationship,

43:52

right? So we sometimes think about it and

43:54

go okay They're gonna have a revolution and

43:56

declare their independence and everything and it's not

43:58

really what they're talking talking about. But

44:02

even having some space between the idea

44:04

of reunification, or basically Beijing

44:06

taking over Taiwan, that

44:08

is something that Xi Jinping

44:11

won't counter. So he doesn't want to hear that.

44:13

So does it matter in a way what happens

44:15

in their elections? I mean, I know at

44:17

least temporarily it's good for the Taiwanese people,

44:20

of course, to express themselves. But ultimately, if

44:22

China wants Taiwan, it's going to take Taiwan,

44:24

at least with this

44:26

American administration, something like that. I

44:29

think that the calculation is more

44:31

about... It's

44:34

not so much about who's in the White House as

44:37

how long is Xi Jinping going to

44:39

stay ahead of China. I

44:42

think he views the

44:44

reunification idea, bringing Taiwan back into

44:47

the fold as his

44:49

key legacy. So I

44:51

think if you could magically figure

44:53

out when he's going to finish up being

44:56

the sort of the iron-fisted ruler of China,

45:00

then you could say, okay, between now and that

45:02

point in time in the future, that's when something's

45:04

going to happen. And I don't think it's going

45:06

to be military. China doesn't want to

45:08

have to worry about a military takeover. And

45:11

they talked about this, sort of the soft

45:13

approach. And you can kind of

45:15

see what they did with Hong Kong. That

45:18

was accelerated and helped in part by

45:20

the pandemic. And we were all over here

45:22

looking at this, and

45:25

they kind of stamped out

45:27

the last investages of democracy during

45:29

that time. And it happened.

45:31

Now, that's a little bit different, in

45:34

a sense, because Hong

45:37

Kong was always sort of temporarily

45:39

leafed. There

45:41

was always a sense that it was going

45:44

back. And so it's not quite the same,

45:46

but they brutally stamped out the democracy movement

45:48

there. And so I think their view on Taiwan,

45:53

despite the fact that there's almost no distance in

45:55

the strait there between the two, is they

45:58

don't want to do it militarily. And

46:00

I think they

46:02

are intent on doing it. They've been

46:04

very clear, particularly during the past year,

46:07

she has made some very clear

46:10

statements that it

46:12

is inevitable, is what he's

46:15

saying. And so, yeah, the

46:17

Taiwanese people look at that and go, there's

46:19

some that want that reunification, but

46:23

the majority want

46:25

things to be essentially the way they are,

46:27

right? And it sort of seems like if

46:29

they think Trump's coming back in a year,

46:31

they might want to escalate

46:33

the speed of that, right? That's what Xi

46:35

might want to do. There could be that

46:38

calculation, but they play

46:40

a longer game. We take everything

46:42

in very small bite-sized chunks. That

46:44

doesn't typically happen in China. They

46:47

play whether it's this sort of issue or

46:49

whether it's an intelligence operation or anything. They

46:51

play a real long game. So

46:53

I don't think we want to read too

46:56

much into just the change in administration. What

46:58

does generally sane China policy look like to

47:00

you? Like I think people hear what you

47:02

said about Iran, it's like you can sort

47:04

of like make sense of your brain. It's

47:06

like, oh, there are weapons in these places.

47:08

There are trade routes being shot at. There's

47:11

people being murdered. That's not how we

47:13

look at China. China is doing a lot of other

47:15

things related to technology, related to releasing COVID, let's say.

47:17

Like there's some other stuff, but it's a little more

47:20

TikTok. It's a little more amorphous

47:23

versus just like military stations in

47:25

countries. TikTok has been, people

47:27

talk about TikTok. The

47:31

Chinese machine would never allow their children to

47:34

have access to TikTok, right? They have a

47:36

different WeChat,

47:39

which is a cleaned up version. Right. It's

47:42

not on my phone, it's on that guy's phone

47:44

over there. Oh, yeah. I told

47:46

him he didn't have to do it, but he wanted to.

47:48

He did, right, yeah. But

47:50

what is like sensible policy related to all

47:52

that, related to like an information war that's

47:54

happening to our young people? I

47:57

will say that one of the things that, previous

48:00

president that Trump did, you know,

48:02

and you hate him, right? You

48:04

know, he's a personality. He's not my cup of tea.

48:07

I lived in New York for a long time. People

48:10

in New York who had a

48:12

chance to watch it, he's a tri-state

48:14

area developer. Yeah, that's where I'm from.

48:16

Yeah, exactly. So, you know, you get punched in

48:18

the nose, you punch the other guy in the nose. I

48:20

mean, people there knew what was happening and what

48:23

the guy was going to be like. Nobody thought

48:25

he was going to suddenly become a sophisticated, you

48:27

know, thoughtful individual who was going to be presidential.

48:30

But one of the things that he did

48:33

that was very smart and I think very

48:35

useful was to elevate the conversation around China

48:38

and to put a spotlight on

48:40

just how much damage the Chinese regime and

48:42

their intel apparatus has done over the decades,

48:44

right, in terms of theft of intellectual property,

48:46

the cost of that to us and to

48:48

our allies, to the West, and

48:52

just the outright theft of

48:55

research and development. Fentanyl,

48:58

I mean. Fentanyl, yeah.

49:00

I mean, it's, yes. So,

49:02

that's a whole separate, you

49:04

know, counter-narcotics issue that, you know,

49:07

but it's

49:11

their intelligence operations, it's their

49:13

economic espionage. Those

49:17

things have done damage

49:19

that we can't even calculate the cost

49:21

of over decades. In

49:23

terms of lost opportunity, lost jobs, lost

49:28

revenue streams, they could have supported and

49:31

built up other countries, other businesses.

49:34

They've been called a blowgawful. And

49:37

then, you know, what they've been

49:40

doing while we, again,

49:43

kind of get focused in one area,

49:45

whether it's Iraq, Afghanistan, domestic

49:47

concerns, whatever it might be, we

49:49

have a hard time, it seems, multitasking.

49:53

And again, with their sort of their longer

49:56

view, they have a strategy. And so, they've

49:58

spent a couple of decades. traveling

50:00

around the world, people for

50:03

the most part know about this Belt and Road

50:05

initiative that China has. But they've

50:07

been going around locking up as an example, locking

50:10

up mining rights in South America

50:13

or in Africa for

50:16

key minerals, critical and rare

50:18

earth minerals. And it's

50:20

the critical minerals that are really important. I always thought, well,

50:22

we call it rare earth and people think, well, those are

50:24

the important ones. You're thinking, man, it's more than the critical

50:26

minerals. They've been locking

50:28

up those opportunities, right? They have

50:31

a monopoly on processing of key

50:33

minerals that we're never going to

50:35

get to 100 percent green

50:39

because we don't have the ability to

50:41

process, much less mine. But to process

50:44

and refine those minerals for things

50:46

that we need, such as, I don't know, batteries. And

50:49

so you hear this talk about battery

50:51

technology and how we're all going to

50:53

go in that direction. And that's great. We should

50:55

be doing lots of different things for energy. But

50:58

the Chinese knew that years ago, and they

51:00

had a plan, and they've been doing this.

51:03

And they also

51:06

do other things. They do things that are more insidious than just

51:08

going around and cutting deals. Usually it's

51:10

sort of a usury situation where the country

51:12

finds out that they're doing a deal with. That

51:14

country then finds out a few years later that

51:16

they're completely in debt, can't afford the

51:18

loans, end up having to give up more. But

51:24

some of the insidious things that they do,

51:26

the Chinese regime and the intel apparatus understood

51:28

the importance of regulatory

51:33

decisions, regulations here in the US. And

51:35

the impact that would have on things

51:38

like mining or agriculture. And

51:41

so as an example, they're

51:43

not trying necessarily – no,

51:46

they are, but it's not – they don't consider it the most

51:48

important part. They're influencing

51:50

local communities. They're influencing local

51:53

politics, state politics at that

51:55

level to make decisions about

51:58

regulations. Phosphate.

52:00

Phosphate's a good example. It's a very good example.

52:03

You like food, you like large-scale agriculture

52:05

to feed the world, you better

52:07

have some phosphate. Fertilizer. So leading

52:12

producers of phosphate, China,

52:15

Morocco, Russia, they're

52:18

up there. But so

52:23

they understood if we go in and

52:25

we impact local community decisions about

52:28

access to phosphate mining

52:31

and we promote or we

52:33

encourage through a variety of

52:36

ways, supporting local activist groups,

52:38

supporting operations that are

52:40

more on a national basis that try

52:43

to do environmental concerns. They're trying to

52:45

do good things. These activists and the

52:47

environment, it's not like it's nefarious

52:49

and they say if we could just kind of deal

52:51

with the Chinese regime, but the Chinese regime understands this.

52:54

And so through a variety of cutouts, they're able to

52:56

support these groups. And the next thing you know, whether

52:58

it's down in Florida, with phosphate or it's anywhere else,

53:01

pounds or city councils are saying, nope, we don't

53:04

want that. We're going to have to

53:06

do something about that. Shut it down. That's

53:08

an enormous benefit to a country that

53:10

is the key producer

53:12

of that mineral. So that's

53:15

something that they do. And I've been fascinated

53:17

by that because it shows again, it

53:19

shows this long view. And from

53:22

an operational perspective, sometimes the

53:24

problems with the CIA is that we tend

53:26

to have a shorter view, right? We're Americans.

53:28

And so that's just a tendency. And

53:31

so our operations tend to have a shorter

53:33

time frame concern, right? We

53:36

don't sometimes think about putting in the hard work

53:38

of 10 to 20 years or 25

53:42

years to develop an asset, right? Or

53:44

to develop a program that's going to

53:46

eventually produce results. And

53:48

that also gets us exactly back to where we started,

53:50

which is why you don't want politics in the agency,

53:52

because then that's going to flip that long term thing

53:55

because administrations are going to come

53:57

and go. Let's just spend the remaining time going a

53:59

little. We went really far east, we'll

54:01

kind of come back a little bit. No, no,

54:03

no, let's just do a little bit about Russia

54:05

and Ukraine. My basic position on this thing from

54:07

the beginning was if we were going to do

54:09

anything there, you got to be really careful because

54:11

the guy's got nukes. So you can't just keep

54:13

saying, okay, arm him, arm him, arm him, because

54:15

at the end of the day, if

54:17

we got that close to the precipice, he's got nukes, so

54:19

you better watch out. And not just nukes, he's got those

54:22

things that you put them on. And the things that you

54:24

mentioned before that they put them on and shoot them all

54:26

over the place. Right. And

54:29

I just don't like blank checks to everybody and

54:31

we're paying pensions for their people, all of that

54:33

stuff. It seems to me it's

54:35

sort of been pushed to the side at the

54:37

moment because of October 7th, so we sort of

54:39

stopped talking about it. But

54:42

Zolensky's at the WEF right now

54:44

in Davos. The war's

54:46

not gone anywhere. I mean, what's going

54:48

on there right now? Yeah, it is

54:50

fascinating, isn't it? Because it was all

54:53

Ukraine all day long. And

54:56

then 7 October happened. Naturally,

54:59

that drew a lot of focus. But it is

55:01

interesting that we again, we have a hard time

55:03

multitasking, including in the media where it's just like,

55:05

we went for a couple of weeks before anybody

55:08

thought, is there something going on still in the

55:10

Ukraine? Right. And

55:12

there is. They're in the winter season, which is brutal

55:14

over there. And they understood

55:16

going into the winter season that there's going to be

55:18

very little ground movement. And so it's

55:21

harder to redeploy troops, it's harder to

55:23

move supplies. So they kind

55:25

of hunker down. It's very World War I-ish,

55:27

right? You got the trench warfare, literally. The

55:30

Soviets. The Russians

55:32

have built enormous trench lines.

55:36

It's incredible. I was at the... It's

55:38

hard to believe people still fight like that. It's hard

55:40

to believe. I was going to say, I took the

55:42

boys. I'm a dual citizen. I was born in England.

55:45

And so the boys have their citizenship. So

55:47

I took all three of them with

55:50

my wife, who's the greatest person I'll ever

55:52

know. And we went to London. And

55:54

I took them to the Imperial War Museum. And

55:57

anybody goes to London, they have to go to the Imperial

55:59

War Museum. the Pirrowar Museum. It's an

56:01

amazing place. They have a World War

56:03

I exhibit. So we're walking around. This was last

56:06

summer. We're walking through the exhibit, and

56:08

I've got the boys, Scooter and Slugo

56:10

and Mugsy, and we're walking through this World

56:12

War I exhibit. And

56:14

we're reading all about the trench warfare,

56:17

and we're reading about how it impacted

56:20

agriculture. And so it created food

56:22

shortages, and it created all

56:24

the things that were happening in World War I. And

56:26

it was happening in Ukraine at that moment.

56:29

You think, how do we possibly regret it?

56:31

How do we go back to this? But

56:33

we did. And so getting back to the present

56:35

time, the war has

56:38

shifted its focus. Now it's a longer-range

56:40

war during the winter months. And

56:44

so what does that mean? That means

56:46

Ukrainians are using their available munitions missiles

56:50

to go after Russian supply lines, further

56:54

behind the lines, and sometimes into

56:56

Russia. And they're going after

56:59

the command and control centers. And so there's this

57:01

long-range battle. They're trying to do more targeted strategic

57:04

strikes on leadership,

57:06

right? And that's a

57:09

hard lift. They're trying to basically

57:12

cut off Crimea, right?

57:15

And Putin is doing the same thing. He did

57:17

the same thing last winter. He's lobbing missiles at

57:19

infrastructure. He's trying to freeze out the Ukrainians during

57:21

the winter months. So he's hitting energy sources as

57:23

much as he can. And

57:27

it's brutal. And Russia's got a

57:29

manpower problem, but they have a

57:31

three-to-one advantage, just in sheer numbers.

57:34

So they're busy

57:36

conscripting and emptying out

57:38

their prisons. Ukrainians have

57:41

their own problems. They've got a

57:43

little bit of internal infighting, in

57:45

part because they're just this dissatisfaction over

57:48

the lack of success during that

57:50

counteroffensive, right? They really were banking

57:52

on that. And that had an impact

57:54

when it didn't go out that way. It also had an impact

57:57

here in the States, where they

57:59

started to get this. this idea that, wait

58:01

a minute, what are we doing? Took

58:03

us 20 years to get fatigued from Afghanistan.

58:06

Took us two years in Ukraine

58:08

fighting Putin. You

58:13

could argue, right, you could argue that

58:15

it's, you know, Ukraine's a proxy, right,

58:17

and you'll hear this from military personnel,

58:20

they're saying, well, look, this

58:22

is a small cost to pay to

58:26

degrade to the degree that we've done, or

58:29

the Ukrainians have done, the Russian

58:31

military, right? And it's also shown

58:34

a lot of weaknesses in the Russian

58:36

military structure, right? And so, we can't,

58:38

if we

58:41

stop providing support to

58:48

the Ukraine, I'm

58:50

not saying we continue with a certain level, I think

58:52

we should be more strategic about the weaponry we're providing

58:54

them. Putin

58:57

will go on the offensive, and it's

58:59

just a matter of time before he would then

59:01

have success, right? And he could well end up

59:03

in Kiev, and that's what he's counting on. He's

59:05

counting on the same thing that the Chinese count

59:07

on with the US, which is we have a

59:09

short attention span, we're gonna get tired

59:11

of it, we're gonna move on to something else. And

59:15

that's what he's banking on. He

59:17

has shown no interest, really, in

59:20

serious negotiation, right,

59:22

and the only interest he would show is if the

59:25

Ukrainians said, okay, you can have everything you've got right

59:27

now. Right. He's not gonna give

59:29

up, Putin's not gonna give up happily or

59:31

willingly Crimea. So is that the

59:33

weird part when you hear from our

59:35

congresspeople and senators, when they're like, well, we

59:37

just have to keep arming them, and it's

59:39

like, well, that just doesn't get us to

59:42

a resolution, because unless you're gonna

59:44

take him out and make sure that the next

59:46

guy doesn't launch some nukes, they're just

59:48

not gonna end this thing. Yeah, and

59:50

that's the problem, is that nobody's

59:52

talked about the roadmap for, where's

59:55

the exit ramp, right? And so, but

59:58

the reality is, Zelensky, came out

1:00:00

and said, we're going to take all our territory.

1:00:02

We're not going to the table until we get

1:00:04

everything back. And again, Putin's not giving up Crimea.

1:00:07

Nobody gave a shit about Crimea, right? Being

1:00:09

taken over by the Russians years ago, it

1:00:11

was not like people in the States weren't

1:00:13

waving Ukrainian flags and like, damn, we're Ukrainian.

1:00:16

It was all different things. It was, yeah.

1:00:18

So it happened and we didn't care. But

1:00:20

now we're like, what? Now we're supposed to

1:00:22

stand and say, because it makes us feel

1:00:24

good, there's got to be a

1:00:27

solution here where they're both going

1:00:29

to not particularly be happy, which is the

1:00:31

typical way that you end these things, that both sides

1:00:33

are a little bit displeased. But

1:00:35

Putin is going to, again, he's not going to

1:00:37

give up willingly Crimea. Can

1:00:41

they get back more of their territory on the Eastern

1:00:43

side? That would be nice to think so. But

1:00:48

there's got to be a resolution to

1:00:50

this because we can't keep providing at

1:00:52

the same level and our NATO allies,

1:00:55

they won't, right? We're

1:00:58

dickering in Congress about the aid package.

1:01:00

They're doing the same thing in the

1:01:02

EU. And

1:01:05

that's got Zelensky worried, but it's playing

1:01:07

into Putin's expectations, right, that we were

1:01:09

going to get tired of it. And

1:01:11

they're doing their own disinformation campaign, right,

1:01:14

to try to influence public opinion here,

1:01:16

right, about that. And yeah,

1:01:19

which is to be expected. Anyway,

1:01:21

so it's a, I guess the answer is, I have

1:01:23

no clue. It's above my pay grade. That

1:01:26

seems like a fitting way to end, Mike. I have

1:01:29

to say this was an absolute pleasure talking about wars

1:01:31

all over the world instead of our political wars. So

1:01:33

I thank you for coming. Thank you, David.

1:01:35

I appreciate it, man. I appreciate it. Thanks

1:01:56

for coming.