Part Of The Problem - The Gaza Peace Deal

Episode Date: October 2, 2025

Dave Smith brings you the latest in politics! On this episode of Part Of The Problem, Dave is joined by co-host Robbie "The Fire" Bernstein to discuss Netanyahu and Trump's statements regarding a peace deal, James Comey being indicted, and more.Support Our Sponsors:Brunt Workwear - http://bruntworkwear.com/ Use code PROBLEMTuttle Twins - https://www.tuttletwins.com/problemVandy Crisps - https://vandycrisps.com/dave Use code "DAVE" for 25% offYoKratom - https://yokratom.com/Part Of The Problem is available for early pre-release at https://partoftheproblem.com as well as an exclusive episode on Thursday!PORCH TOUR DATES HERE:https://www.eventbrite.com/cc/porch-tour-2025-4222673Find Run Your Mouth here:YouTube - http://youtube.com/@RunYourMouthiTunes - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/run-your-mouth-podcast/id1211469807Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/4ka50RAKTxFTxbtyPP8AHmFollow the show on social media:X:http://x.com/ComicDaveSmithhttp://x.com/RobbieTheFireInstagram:http://instagram.com/theproblemdavesmithhttp://instagram.com/robbiethefire#libertarianSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hey guys, today's show is brought to you by YoCratum. Grab some at YoCratum.com, home of the $60 kilo, longtime sponsor of the part of the problem podcast. If you are over 21 and you enjoy Kratum, make sure to get your cratum at yoKratum.com. It's delivered right to your door and it's the best price you will ever find $60 for a kilo at yo cratim.com. All right, let's start today's show. Hello, hello, boys and girls. Welcome to a brand new episode of Part of the Problem. I am Dave Smith. He is Robbie the Fire, Bernstein.

We got a good show for you today. How you feeling, Rob? Doing good. Excited for some Dallas this weekend. Always good club. Yes, hyenas in Dallas and Fort Worth. Me and Rob will be there this weekend. Hold on me.

Let me see if I can get that up for you. Sorry, one second. um yes it will be uh that friday we're in dallas saturday we're in fort worth uh october third and fourth that's uh backwards from last year if i remember correctly yeah we're trying it a little different this time see how that works maybe maybe that's going to change things uh then the following weekend will be out in detroit at the house of comedy um and then the following weekend after that we'll be at tampa side splitters these are all these three this run in the next three weeks are three of me and Rob's favorite clubs in the country.

So definitely come check us out there. Comicdaversmith.com for all those tickets. Also, I did want to mention that, so I know we missed the episode yesterday. We will be making that up. I apologize for that. We'll be putting out another episode tomorrow. I have Colonel Douglas McGregor coming back on the show. So I'm very excited to talk to him and get his insights on a lot of things that are going

on in the world. And so I missed yesterday. I did, I recorded a Coleman Hughes podcast yesterday and we did, I think we did three and a half hours. So we ended up going, I think, much longer than either of us planned on, but we did a long show. I thought it was, I thought it was really good. I think you, I hope you guys enjoy it. I was going to say, I think you'll enjoy it, but I hope you do. And I think that should be out in the next few days.

I will say, what was interesting about this was that Coleman, and I say this to his credit, he literally started the thing. We did three and a half hours. and the first thing he said was uh was he goes you know i see constantly when you're in these debates the debate becomes about you rather than the topic and i don't want to do that and i want to like debate the issues and we did i think keep it a very civil conversation that was about the issues so that's all i'll say you guys can judge the um how you feel about the uh the results of it or whatever but uh how many is all debates do you have left in you i feel like at this point it should be

Ben Shapiro or nothing. Yeah, I mean, yeah, I don't know. I don't know. It's a, you know, I try to just kind of judge these things on a case-by-case basis. Like, one of the reasons why I wanted to talk to Coleman is because I did think he would have that attitude. And I thought that would be like, you know, kind of interesting. And of course, you know, I'm, I got to say, I'm almost like baffled at the people who can still support this thing at this point. And so there was something about that dynamic that I thought was. And it was, I think essentially what I thought, it would be what I hoped it would be um and you know I don't know you just I just kind of go on a case by case and go like okay if this one makes sense then this one makes sense I you know I at this

point it's a weird thing where I do it's not and it's not just the debates it shows in general there was you know I remember Rob this when I first started part of the problem um but this is like uh 2012 or something like that there's a no audience there was a podcasting is like it's a ridiculous thing to start you know it's like when you're starting from nothing you're just like i'm just going to talk into this microphone you know and then okay many years later people started listening uh but i used to have a thing where i'd answer all the comments that was like a segment on the show through a tiny show or getting like six comments on a show so you just go through the comments and respond to every single one of them and then there was

a period where i'd be like oh i'll debate anyone or i'll do anyone's show you know because you're not getting invited on that many so it's like you'll just do all of them and at a certain point you just like it's like half my day is going through all the requests of all the things and i just only have so much time in the day so like i just have to be a lot more picky about what i do now as opposed to before but i do struggle with the science of that like you get challenged to do a debate it's a debate you know you can go win you're like okay i'll go win another debate but at the same time you're like i've already done this debate so many times you're not there's no real new eyeballs getting on this you know it's it's it's difficult to um to judge when to do them and when not to but i judge the coleman one

uh one that was worthy of doing and i think i was right uh about that so i look forward to uh you guys seeing it and to his audience seeing it as well volunteering themselves as it becomes harder to argue so i guess it's interesting to put them on the record and like more heads for the mantle yeah and i do look i mean i do obviously inherently to some degree right like it's almost um it's you you can deduce logically from the fact that we're doing this show that i still do believe in persuasion you know at least to some degree like not that i think i'm going to like change coleman's mind or convert 100% of his audience but i do still believe that like there's got to be some people who if we're just having a calm rational

conversation about this will go like and he is making some really good point You know, it's like, whatever that is, even if it's just at the margins, I still, you know, like, I always used to have the attitude. And I, like I still do to some degree. Like I said, I just have constraints with time. And then the other thing is just having little kids. And particularly, like, there's something like, like I had babies for years. But in a weird way, there's actually a lot more free time when you have babies compared

to when you have little kids. Because you, little kids start having things in their schedule. And then you out, like, your baby's just always there. So you're always kind of getting quality time with your baby. But like when you have older kids, it's like, oh, if you're always busy, you might be busy in the little bit of time that they had free. Anyway, but I always had the attitude like, but there might be like one person listening to this show who like is me 15 years ago or something. And I reach that person. And then he's like, oh, shoot, that just made total sense.

And so that always would motivate me to want to do them. Anyway, let's get into it because there's a lot. that has happened in the 48 hours since last me and you recorded an episode of course two days ago when we were recording it was during the Benjamin Netanyahu meeting with Donald Trump there had been hints at Donald Trump pushing a deal of some sort but it wasn't exactly clear at that time that they were going to announce the deal in the manner that they did they did do like a little little joint press conference thing afterward, but they didn't take questions. So let's play. We have a couple clips here. One of them's of Benjamin Netanyahu, one of

them's of Trump. So let's play both these clips, and then we're going to discuss the peace deal. I think we should understand that we're giving everybody a chance to have this done peacefully, something that will achieve all our war objectives without any further bloodshed. But if Hamas rejects your plan, Mr. President, or if they supposedly accept it and then then basically do everything to counter it, then Israel will finish the job by itself. This can be done the easy way, or it can be done. the hard way, but it will be done. We prefer the easy way, but it has to be done. All these goals must be achieved because we didn't fight this horrible fight, sacrifice the finest

of our young men, to have Hamas stay in Gaza and threaten us again and again and again with these horrific massacres. all right so there is benjamin netting yahoo uh doing his gangster thing you know that he does we could do this the peaceful way this is a funny thing to say after you've destroyed the entire gaza strip we could do this the easy way or the hard way so essentially amaz you either accept the deal as is or we will continue the campaign that genocide scholars are in large numbers considering a genocide um i will say uh i guess i which is just like the obvious here.

And unlike a lot of people, I am consistent with this across the board, but it's interesting because a lot of the people who are like appalled by Zelensky don't seem so outraged by Netanyahu. But it really, there really is something that like when a country who is completely dependent

on the United States of America, including dependent on the United States of America to conduct the current military campaign that it's conducting, It is, I just can't explain how infuriating and appalling it is that you come over here, not asking for our support or trying to persuade us of our support, but dictating gangster shit. We can either do this the easy way or the hard way. Like it's just, I don't know.

I find this to be outrageous. It is such a, in the same sense as Zelensky is sitting there and going, now we could think, we're not going to sign that deal without security guarantees. And you're like, oh, what, you're just in tight. to us to fight and die to protect you. Like, it's outrageous. And at the same time, for Benton Yahoo to just be like, this is how it's going to be done. Like, excuse me, if you just believe in national sovereignty at all, like, excuse me, you're a foreign leader.

And this is like our decision to make or so they would have us believe. All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Vandy. Did you know all chips and fries used to be cooked in tallow up until the 1990? 90s, when big corporations switched over to cheap processed seed oils, well, Vandy Crisps decided to do something about that. They created a tasty and delicious potato chip with just three ingredients and no seed oils. That grass-fed beef tallow is not just for flavor. It's packed with nutrients, which are great for your skin, your brain, and your hormones. Snacking on Vandy is nothing like eating regular chips. With Vandy, you feel satiated, light and energetic with no crash, bloat,

or gross sluggish feeling afterward. Vandy is 100% American-made with zero compromises, the best chip you'll ever have. And as an added bonus, that beef tallow makes the chips much more satiating so you won't find yourself uncontrollably binging and still feeling hungry afterward. If you're ready to give Vandy a try,

go to Vandycrisps.com slash Dave and use the promo code Dave for 25% off your first order. That's Vandycrisps.com slash Dave. Dave, promo code Dave for 25% off your first order. And if you don't feel like ordering online, that's fine. Vandy is now available nationwide at your local Sprout supermarket. Stop by and pick up a bag before they're gone. All right, let's get back into the show.

Any thoughts on Netanyahu's line here before we hear from Donald Trump? Well, I certainly think his line when he says, you know, if Hamas back's out of this, then we're just going to go ahead and get this done. he's not just saying he's not suddenly saying Israel is going to be spending its money and its money only and without the support of the United States he's going to go ahead and get it done but I think that I think he's talking to Amos here and saying that we're agreeing to Trump's deal and if Hamas doesn't keep its end of its part of the bargain then we're going back in and we're killing them all yes no I granted he's talking to Hamas here and he's agreeing with

Trump's deal but part of Trump's deal wasn't we're going to go kill them all if they don't do That's his addition onto it. And they will be doing that with U.S. support. Anyway, well, I guess I shouldn't say that. Donald Trump did kind of hint at that, too, to be fair enough. Let's hear from Donald Trump himself, because this was an interesting part of the press conference. A lot of our leaders are here, our great vice president,

Susie Wiles, Steve Whitgough, Jared Kushner. They've been so involved in this process. I don't think anybody else could have done it or even come close. But we're right there. We're right there at first time in thousands of years, I think, you can probably say. If you really look into it, if you study back, if you're a scholar, you would say thousands of years, Israel would have my fall back into finish the job

of destroying the threat of Hamas. But I hope that we're going to have a deal for peace. and if Amas rejects the deal, which is always possible, they're the only one left. Everyone else has accepted it, but I have a feeling that we're going to have a positive answer. But if not, as you know, baby, you'd have our full backing to do what you would have to do. All right. So, yeah, and yes, to be clear, there, of course, he does say you would have our full backing, because, of course, they always would.

I guess that's kind of my point, is that there? doing it with our backing um there's so there's there's some interesting things here um in the deal the and maybe getting into the actual deal now this has been reported there was a i was just reading an article in axios about this and then there was one other um i actually probably pulled this up and figure what was the other source that i had and i was reading another piece about this earlier today um yeah it was axios had one and essentially what they're saying is that Netanyahu, you know, changed. So what happens here is there was a deal

that was worked out to that was agreed by a bunch of other Arab leaders. And then Netanyahu had like a six or eight-hour meeting with Whitkoff and Kushner. And they made some key changes. And now Donald Trump is presenting this as, look, this is the deal that everybody agreed, to but a lot of the arab leaders have already been like hey like no this isn't what we agreed to and

the changes in it where was it was um right there was also it was in the times of israel that i was reading there was also a piece about this that kind of seemed to back up the same um netanyahu was able to like essentially achieve key changes in the agreement before you know the the agreement that that trump ultimately presented i'm not saying that this is accurate but i'd read an axios that basically Trump told Netanyahu the deal is as is and if no changes can be made to it and we will walk away from full support of Israel

if you don't accept it as is. Now it could be that that was a Trump bluster phone call after adjustments had already been made to make it acceptable to Netanyahu. Yeah. Well, I'll return it to you because then I do have other comments about it. Sure, sure.

Well, the latest, the latest reporting is that, Netanyahu got his changes in after that. Of course, there have been other people coming from particularly some of the more hawkish sources that like, oh, you know, Donald Trump really brought Netanyahu to heal on this. I'm not buying that at all. It will perhaps before will come out to say yes today and make changes later. Yes. Well, this is, let me just say, I'll say it like this, okay? Because I think there's actually, there's a little bit of nuance to how I feel about all of this. And so I'd say, number one, just to understand what's going on, because this seems to me

to be fairly obvious. And this is the way that these things tend to work. We mentioned on our last show, the secret recording video of Netanyahu, where he's literally bragging about doing this during the Oslo peace process, that he would put all of these poison pills into the agreement. And so then it becomes this like, oh, this isn't really, you know, like in that case, it was that he can determine, you know, he was like, we'll give the Palestinians autonomy over the West Bank, but we still control the key military areas. And then he's like, I say that all

of area sea is a key military area and all of this. So, ha, ha, we put this in, but we weren't real. And what this allows them to do, it's kind of twofold. Number one, if they accept the agreement, well, they didn't really get what they thought, you still have total control of the whole damn thing and how it actually plays out from there. And so even if they had accepted the agreement, this results in a in a real Palestinian state never because Netanyahu can prevent it or you don't accept the agreement which is what happened in ultimately at the in the culmination with Oslo and then all of the Zionist propagandists can say we offered the peace and then they didn't take it this was part of what me and me and Coleman Hughes argued about yesterday but so look again also this is exactly what happened during the Iran negotiations that failed preceding the 12-day war, 12-day for now war, which is that the hawks insisted when the negotiations were happening, they insisted that Donald Trump stay firm to you have to not enrich uranium at all, give up your civilian nuclear program completely, and they

were like, no, we're not going to do that. So you put the thing in that you know they won't agree to do, and then you could say, hey, we tried to negotiate, and it didn't work. That overwhelmingly seems to be what this is. Essentially, the key changes that Netanyahu made were about, and let me pull this up, this is from Dave DeCamp, he had a piece on this earlier today, the great Dave DeCamp, who's always really on top of these things, one of the best war reporters out there. Anti-War.com is where this was published, of course. Reading from the article, the changes were related to two of the most sensitive issues in

negotiations, the disarmament of Hamas and Israel's withdrawal from Gaza. The new proposal ties Israel's phased withdrawal from territory to the demilitarization of Gaza and the ability of an international force to take over the land. The proposal also essentially gives Israel and the U.S. a veto over the withdrawal from Gaza by stating that the IDF, quote, will withdraw based on standards, milestones, and timeframes linked to demilitarization. that will be agreed upon between the IDF, ISF, the guarantors, and the U.S. So essentially what's going on with the details of this are that Israel, like the deal that Hamas has been saying for whatever you want to, you know, however much you want to trust that they'll keep their word. But the deal that Hamas has been repeatedly proposing is that we'll return all the rest of the hostages if you withdraw from Gaza.

okay now the the difference here is the proposal that's being offered to Hamas here is essentially you have to bend the knee you have to bend the knee and trust that Israel will follow through with its part so in other words they have to release the hostages before Israel has to release anybody okay so they have to hope that Israel will still do it after all that and that they have to put down all their weapons and then hope that Israel will say, okay, that's satisfactory now, now we can withdraw. And so, of course, what's being set up here is that even if they accept this deal, there's, you know, look, the thing, when Benjamin Netanyahu says, you know, the eradication of Hamas is the goal here, right? We can't, we're not

going to finish the job unless if Hamas is still there when they have vowed to attack us over and over again. Well, like just for the sake of argument, if Hamas tomorrow just said, we're not calling ourselves Hamas anymore. We're calling ourselves, you know, or whatever. They just said, we're calling ourselves that. Same people, same guns, same thing. Do you think Netanyahu would go, oh, that's okay then? Because it's not, no, of course, right? It's not about the group being, essentially the corner that Israel in a way has painted themselves into is that Israel will say, yeah, we'll withdraw as soon as there's no young men in Gaza who wish to resist Israel,

who wish to avenge their parents or their sisters or their cousins. As soon as there's none of that, we'll withdraw. Now, what does that sound like to you, Rob? It sounds like the perfect excuse to never withdraw, right? So this is already what's being set up here. Okay, so all of that is true. And I'm sorry, I'm rambling here, but I do want to get your thoughts, but I just to be clear that I get all of this out.

All of that is true. And I would still say, I hope Hamas takes this deal. I just, I just watched this game. I know, I know it's a tails I win, heads you lose. I know it's that. It's just that this, this at least has a, it's on the table. It at least has a shot of maybe stopping the dying. for a little bit and then hopefully like i think the best play here would be to like take this

deal and then let the world see that you took the deal and then let the world see that israel still is going to find an excuse and not demilitary at least maybe it'll slow down the killing for now i understand where that's very easy from my perspective to say and if you've been militarily occupied by a foreign country for 60 years and you've decided to violently fight back you're probably not going to take that. Also, obviously, if the last two years has demonstrated anything, Hamas is willing to make the calculation that, oh, a lot of our people will die, but global opinion will be turned against you. There's, I'll say, just like for an example here, and then I promise this is the last thing, and I'll turn it over to you, Rob. But the original

UN partition recommendation in 1947, right? At the time, I think by this point, I think like a third of the population in what is Palestine now was Jewish. It's about two thirds, Arab, one third Jewish. But that was a new development. Historically, the Jewish population had been much lower than that. They had gotten a lot of new people in in the last few years. And, or maybe, I mean, immigration was limited for a while in World War II, but I mean like 10 years, 20 years before it was much less than a third were Jewish. But there were about a third of them were Jewish. And I believe the percentage of property that they owned was less than that. It's been a while since I've read these numbers. But the U.N. partition recommendation recommended that a Jewish state gets 56% of the land

and that an Arab state will get 44% of the land. And understandably, this was rejected by the Arabs and accepted by the Zionist settlers because, like, that was really good deal for them. From the Arab perspective, it was like, I don't know, why should the people who are a third of the population get over 50% of it? That's not a fair deal. And so you could totally understand why they turn that down. In fact, I don't know that anybody, anybody that I've ever heard, like, has actually taken on that argument and been like, no, it was fair for the Jewish state to get 56%. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but there really is no argument for that. So you can totally understand why the Arabs turned it down.

also you could say in hindsight i kind of wish they had taken it it's true that it is unfair but like if you had taken that maybe there was a chance that we didn't end up in a war that basically has been going on since then up till now i don't know so i guess i kind of feel that way it's like yes this is an unfair deal yes it's set up to probably sabotage you at the same time what other play do you have here other than this insane strategy of sacrificing your own people like you're up against this evil force that's willing to just slaughter your people. What other option is that are on the table? Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't really see it here.

So I don't think it's likely that this deal is going to be accepted by Hamas. I think Netanyahu is designing it so that it's probably not going to be. There's already been some signals to that effect that Hamas is just like not happy with it. They've given them like three days, I think, or something like that to sign on to it. I doubt that this is going to work. I kind of hope it does. I hope anything that will stop people from dying as quickly as possible would work. And yeah, okay, so those are basically my thoughts.

Take it away, Rob. There's a lot about this deal that's fascinating to me. And the biggest one is it seems designed so that Hamas can't accept it. The biggest poison pill being that they have to give up all the hostages first, and then trust that the rest of the Israeli side will actually take place. And then all of Hamas has to actually give them. up and drop arms and then hope that they're actually given amnesty if they did so. And then I believe that some are allowed to stay if they swear to be peaceful towards Israel.

And others will be allowed to relocate to some location that hasn't been disclosed yet. You know, Donald Trump, not all the details will be given to you, nor have the details been given. If you're given amnesty, I guess what kind of monitoring you might then have to submit to in order to ensure that you remain peaceful. Yeah. But it somewhat seems like this deal was constructed so that, you know, Donald Trump could turn around and said, hey, I gave them a sweetheart deal where we were going to invest in all the area.

And this would have been the best things for the Gazans. And they didn't accept it. Problem with that is that Hamas didn't accept it. And you didn't really give Hamas a deal that makes sense for Hamas because I think you'd probably have to show, you'd probably have to give a little bit more of the specifics on how exactly they're going to be treated if now they just decide to completely give up on their cause and give themselves over. So it seems to me like this deal is mostly designed to fail.

Now, with that said, I don't think Netanyahu wants this deal on the table because I think he wants to push forward with what he's been doing. And I actually, from what I've read, it seems like Trump was pretty upset about the cutter thing. And now here's where it gets real interesting. I also agree with you that right now, it's probably in the people of Gaza, their best interest to take this deal and hope that the investment comes in and that Donald Trump actually has in mind some sort of a way for these people to live, live peacefully and potentially be allowed to remain in the area with more investment and prosperity. I think their best option right now is to hope that that's true. Well, at least it increases, I'm sorry, but at least it increases aid in the

immediate, in the short run. I mean, it's something. I think, I think with the options on the table, it would make sense if you could, if you could, if the people of Gaza could vote, I think this option is probably their best option at the moment. Now, with that said, apparently Kushner has been working on this thing for years and he's been working on it with Tony Blair. That's the guy's name. Right. Yeah, that's another. Yep. Yep. That's another interesting. Now Tony Blair was, I've been reading up on this. So apparently that guy was a big pusher of the Iraq war. And in the last couple years, he's not just to be clear, not just a pusher, but the British sent in in the tens of thousands of Trump.

troops. I mean, he was a, he was the prime minister of England while they, you know, they fought the war as well. He was like after George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, the next most guilty guy about the war in Iraq. And so now you've got Tony Blair, who's been making billions of dollars doing, I don't know what in the Middle East, but he's out there. He's been wheeling and dealing since the Iraq war. It just kind of reads me like a bit of a Hillary Clinton type character, but out of England. And so now what you've got? what I think the world economic forums involved in this and the idea is that people are going to be dislocated from the region but guaranteed right of return within five years we don't know where

they're being sent to i've also watched construction projects on united states highway that we're supposed to take a year provide traffic for me for 20 years um so there's a i'm just saying it it's a classic don't trump no plan plan that firstly i don't think he really wants this deal to move forward because he put poison pills in it that i think won't be accepted and i think the idea is to try and court a little bit of favor so that he could try and present the American people. This is all Hamas's fault. I gave him an out and they could have had a Riviera of the Middle East. But if they do push forward with the Riviera of the Middle East, and let's just say it is the Palestinian or the people that live in Gaza's best option, this seems like some real

shady, dirty dealing. And I don't really imagine that the people of Gaza are returning in five years or that there's going to be a lot of development that helps them. And this also does kind of just take option of them having their own state off the table yeah even though uh as is always the case even though it vaguely alludes to like one day this happening in five years tony blair is going to give up uh control to i i don't know the arab leagues to then run run the area yeah well was in the late 70s at the first camp david meeting which is where the piece between israel and egypt was struck um that that that was part of the agreement that like hey you got to start a process that one day you got to end this occupation you know because you think like this is like the late 70s

so they started occupying um palestine in 1967 so this is like the late 70s it's like guys it's been a decade you know what i mean like you got to you got to take your boot off their neck at some point and they go okay we agree to do that and then that's what oslo was too was supposed to be officially starting the process to someday give these people a state which is like again like as i got into this argument with coleman hughes uh that you guys listened to yesterday we were saying like the thing that's so ridiculous about it is that like this whole is really live like but we don't have a partner for peace it's like you don't actually need a partner like in the same way that you don't need like if you have like a bunch of slaves and you

go I offered them their freedom but they won't agree to it it's like you just stop enslaving them that's it you don't like you don't have to do that Israel could just retreat to 67 borders and stop militarily occupying Gaza in the West Bank that could do that it'd be an enormous gesture of goodwill and probably win a lot of global opinion over but like they don't want to they'd rather have the control and so yes so once again like it does seem like if when the occupation was like 10 years old if you're going hey you have to agree to eventually give them a state and they go yeah yeah sure and now the thing is like 60 years old and you're going oh you have to one day agree you know nobody is really taking that seriously

nobody believe and and judge just based off the israeli government's actions over the years everything has been designed to thwart and they openly say this they openly admit it that Everything's been designed to thwart the creation of a Palestinian state. Yeah, also, you know, to your point, bringing in Tony Blair, the guy whose most famous thing ever was the disastrous war in Iraq, bringing all the crazy, you know, financial interests that Kushner and I think Whitkoff himself all have in the area, it's all just screams of corruption. And like, it's, yeah, I essentially agree with your assessment there. And so it also seems like this is inevitably going to lead to more U.S. involvement, more of a role that Trump is going to play, and who is the official guy in charge of this part of Gaza or whatever. Anyway, it doesn't look like anything good. And then, of course, like as all these negotiations always are, they're like a, they're a tool for the Israeli government and its propaganda.

us to go look we tried we tried to do a negotiation and this is how it went and i think that you know look like obviously you've got two people here who have been at war essentially since 1947 all the way to 2025 and you just you know it's very easy for both sides to to feel like whatever violence they're doing is a response to the last violence of the other side. You know what I mean? Like when you when you got like it's very easy for people on the pro-Israel side to say, hey, this this war, as they would call it, is a response to October 7th. But then it's very easy for people on the pro-Palestinian side to say, no, no, no. October 7th was a response to this brutal occupation or even just the fact that the year 2023 had been one of the most violent years

record, like the Israel killed a whole bunch of Palestinians that year just earlier in the year in regular old military, you know, campaigns. And so when you have a conflict where there's been violence and aggression on each side for so long, it's easy for both sides to say, no, no, no, we're the ones in what we were just responding to that, you know, like you, what I always like come down on with, with the big Israel question is that, okay, so you're going everything is a tick for, Everything is a response to that to response to this. But if you zoom out, you just go like, yeah, but like a bunch of Europeans decided that

they were going to create a Jewish state on a plot of land where Arabs lived. And those Arabs did not wish for a Jewish state to be created there. And the creation of that state involves 750,000 of them being kicked out of where they lived and never let back in. And that's bad enough. But like, you could probably get past that eventually. States are created in messed up ways all the time. The real problem is that then.

in 1967, only 20 years after that last war started, they started militarily occupying them and have done so ever since for 60 years. And so now every time they go, like, what do you want to say here? Like this whole, and this, look, I know this is a really bitter pill for people to swallow, particularly for Jewish Zionists, and maybe so for Christian Zionists as well. But like, if you just zoom out and look at this and you go, okay. you had this idea, right? This idea of Zionism, which you could say, the Jews need their own state.

Like, okay, fair enough. Like, the Jews need their own state for security. You know, it's reasonable enough on the face of it. Okay, you know, there's a diaspora. There's a group of people who are like, they're not all in one place, but there's a little bit of them everywhere, and they sure have been mistreated all over the place,

and they want to go live here, fine. It's like you have this idea for a project. But the project, just, again, you can always blame every little actor or who did something wrong or who, you know, there's lots of people who made mistakes and did really horrible things over the years. But the bottom line is that the project

of creating the nation state of Israel required a massive, a massive ethnic cleansing campaign to create the state, ethnically cleansing 750,000 people out of their land. It required 60 years of military occupation to maintain the thing. And now it is requiring what?

Scholars are debating over whether as a genocide or not to culminate like this whole project. And at a certain point, if that's what's necessary for this project, I think it is pretty reasonable for people, including American Jews like ourselves, to go, maybe we shouldn't be propping this thing up here as Americans, as American taxpayers. Like if you still need all of this and all of our support to make this thing work, then maybe this was just a bad idea. like maybe we can discuss other you know possibilities maybe maybe jews need to find a place where they can buy up a whole lot of property voluntarily and create their own jewish state there or something like that

and maybe this just doesn't work now i would much rather see a but i would much rather see like a two state solution 67 borders or something like that but it is i think it is fair to ask those questions they're just they're staring you right in the face and so anyway the idea which i was said before Israel's kind of painted themselves into this corner in a way, like particularly with, with their rhetoric that they're saying, we're not going to end this until even Benjamin Netanyahu right now. Look at all this effort, you know, Scott Horton was a, he was debating General Wesley Clark again. They've done this several times now in Pierce Morgan. They've all been real interesting.

And like one of the final things on the show, Scott said something about how horrible, you know, Donald Trump was for support and the destruction of Palestine. And then General Wesley Clark said something, like, I forget exactly what he said, but this is really the four-star general, who I always love quoting, but the, he said something like he goes, yeah, but then you let Hamas claim victory. You know, like if Netanyahu pulls out now, you let them claim victory. But isn't this just the most horrible version of a sunk cost fallacy, Rob, that like, right? Because you could say the same thing for Vietnam or Afghanistan or any of them. Like, well, yeah, but that's the whole thing. That's the whole thing.

If you're going to sit here and say that the standard is that there has to be no young man in Gaza who wants to avenge any of what we, what Israel just did to them, then that's a guarantee you're in forever war. Like, that's it. And the insurgencies, like, as we've seen in all these countries, like, they're very, very hard to beat. They're very hard to beat. as of right now in Gaza where the whole strip has been fucking destroyed i mean rob you've seen the

pictures of what gaza looks like right now they are they're retrieving um israeli bombs that didn't detonate digging them out of the ground and using them to take out tanks they're still having said benjamin netanyahu's talking about all the people they've lost even in this conflict they're still fighting back even after all this and so like the obvious only answer is that you can't go, like you can't go, I'm going to keep my boot on your neck with all of my weight on it until you stop squirming. You got to go. I'm going to take my boot off your neck and then stop squirming, please, after that. It's the only, you know, real conclusion that there's no political will to see happening. All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank

our sponsor for today's show, which is Brunt, Brunt, workwear. You got to check them out. Choosing work boots used to mean sacrificing comfort or durability. If they felt good, they didn't last. And if they lasted, they just destroyed your feet. That is over. Brunt has made the best pair of work boots you will ever get. They sent me a pair of them. I love them. They are as comfortable as your most comfortable pair of sneakers, but they're serious work boots that are ready for any job. Definitely go check them out. You work too hard to be stuck in uncomfortable boots that don't hold up. Go check out bruntworkware.com and make sure to use the promo code problem. For a limited time, our listeners will get $10 off. Once again, that's

bruntworkware.com. The promo code is problem. Go use that. You get 10 bucks off and you're good to go. The most comfortable pair of work boots you will ever put on your feet that do hold up. And after you order, they'll ask you where you heard about Brunt. Do us a favor. Make sure you tell them the part of the problem podcast. All right, let's get back into the show. Anyway, any other thoughts are up? Go ahead. Well, I guess we got three days to see if Hamas responds

and whether or not Trump actually keeps to his deadline and whether or not they actually have any sort of a plan in place that can be enacted or might actually help the Palestinians or was actually agreed to by the Arabs. So still a lot of unknown variables to see how it plays out. Yeah, yeah, agreed. And my, you know, my, most my best guess as of right now is that Hamas is not going to agree to this and that

you know more disaster will continue in the short term unfortunately I hope I'm wrong about that but that'd be my guess um all right let's let's uh switch gears and talk a little bit about um the the the Charlie Kirk letter to Benjamin Netanyahu that was another big story that happened the other day, the New York Post published the full letter. Now, if you recall the Benjamin Netanyahu immediately after Charlie's assassination had read a few lines of this and the Candace Owens, as well as some others, had called on him to release the whole letter. And there's obviously, it's something we've talked a lot about on this show. There's just like a very interesting story. This is something that's been covered pretty extensively by Candice, by Megan Kelly, by Tucker Carlson, and we have on the show as well here talking about just like the dynamic of what was going on with Charlie Kirk and his young people, you know, Israel bleeding support amongst his young people.

And so anyway, this letter, the New York Post published this letter. Now, did you read the piece, Rob? I did. Yes. Now, I did notice in there, correct me if I'm wrong. I did read the piece twice looking for this, but they did not explicitly say where they got the letter from. Like they kind of like they, sorry, go ahead. No, I just jumped to reading the letter. I didn't even read their characterization of it, but I did, I did pick up on that. It wasn't clear. I was just going to go, if you want to take it as fact that this was actually a letter from Charlie Clerk to Netanyahu. Here's my thought about it. But. but, you know, they didn't really validate. No, but they did, they did seem to just present it as fact. We have obtained, we have obtained the letter. This is what the full letter says.

And all I'm saying is, by the way, I said that not on air, but I did just privately say this. When Candace first called for Netanyahu to release the letter, I always thought it was like, yeah, but like if the letter comes back just saying none of the stuff you're saying's in it, you're just going to say that this wasn't the, you know, like if the source on it is Netanyahu, then it just seems like a lot of people would think there's a possibility it has been altered or something like that. Now, I don't know enough. And it doesn't

explicitly say, I'm just saying like if the letter, if the letter was written to Benjamin Netanyahu, who has a copy of the letter, unless there is like, oh, turning point had a copy of it too or something like that, which it certainly was not explicitly said in the piece. So that'd be the first thing. I will say, though, the, the, like just assuming that's not the case which I don't know that it is at all this seemed to fit in like kind of be a piece of the puzzle

that fit kind of right into what would have seemed reasonable to me it's true it does show you that like Charlie Kirk is calling in a sense for like Hasbara to get their shit together you know he's like look like I'm in this position of supporting Israel

And you guys are getting, you know, he's saying this in a very diplomatic kind way, but he's like, you guys are getting destroyed. And he doesn't exactly say this, but it did seem to me to be like a heavy implication that he's listing out the talking points. He's going, look, man, I'm taking questions from young people. And here are all the questions that they have. And now, he doesn't exactly say it, but he's kind of like saying like, we got to have. a response to this because right now we don't have one now that is reading between the lines a little bit but i think rob you read the letter only a little bit like that's kind of what he's saying the whole time you guys got to find a way to completely reinvent how you're countering this stuff like

what are we talking about doing here man because you're getting killed in this information war and i just think that there was i don't know there's something interesting there in this story that it still does show because the story, you know, when people were trying to make the like Israel killed Charlie Kirk claim, like, as I always said, it was like, there was never any evidence for that. There still isn't any evidence for that. There's not really a strong reason to even suspect it or be looking for evidence. But hey, if you want to look for it, you find some, I'll certainly take a look at it.

There's no reason to suspect that as of right now. There, aside from that, though, there just is a really interesting story about this guy and the dynamic of what was going on. And like we've said before, it all seems to come, essentially, yes, Charlie Kirk is the big tent Republican guy who's trying to get people to vote for the Republicans, Donald Trump last time, J.D. Vance, or whoever next time. And he's got to deal with young people. These young people are abandoning Israel in droves for obvious reasons that we cover at length on

this show. and yet he knows that he can't you know he has to somehow try to facilitate that like you can't have a big tent that doesn't include Tucker Carlson or Megan Kelly or Candice Owens on the right wing it's just not enough tent left they're too big a portion of the thing he'd already decided he's keeping Nick Fuentes out they already decided there's this young movement that I don't want to be a part of so he like he's in this position where like well I got to at least be able to moderate a debate on the topic, you know, so he's in this position, then he's getting all types of pressure because that's not good enough, you know what I mean? And his hardcore backers

want him to, they have, they insist that he treat Tucker Carlson like a Nazi, you know? And, and he knows he can't do that. So he's in this impossible position. And here is this letter where he seems to really be, again, Rob, you give your thoughts after this. I don't think I'm mischaracterizing this. He seems to be pleading with Netanyahu for some help. Like, send me some backup here. I don't know what to do. And then offering some help of his own. But I don't know. What are your thoughts on the letter? That was my takeaway was that it felt like a letter to corporate. Either before someone's going to quit the team or someone who still really cares about the company, but just see his

misdirection. It did not seem like he was. interested in continuing to defend these perspectives, but it was a letter of, hey, you're making my job impossible. And you guys have to figure out how to start doing a little bit more because I can't, I can't just win this fight. Now, what I found most interesting about the letter was in his appeal for help, I think he's asking Israel to come up with better talking points on questions that they know that they can address. And that's why they're leaving it for people like Charlie Kirk or others to kind of talk on their behalf because it's a little bit like Joe Biden on the border wall thing. You can lie about that topic for two years and go, no, we care about border

security. No, there is no emergency. No, there is no problem. And at some point, if you're actually doing the thing that people are concerned with, the truth does come out. And it's same thing happened with COVID. You know, there's some storylines where, you know, if you keep saying, hey, I'm interested in peace, but then you keep just killing people, at some point, people are like, well, you just keep killing people. And so the problem is governments like Netanyahu, I think they're more interested in censorship because they can't actually justify what they're doing when you're asking questions of why is this a strategic partner? Why is this in the U.S. best interest? Why should we be supporting this with all these innocent? Like I can understand you're hearing these questions

from kids and you're like, I don't have answers to these questions. Yeah. I need some answers and I don't think Netanyahu. Now listen, Netanyahu someone has taken this advice. He's going on American podcasts and you know I don't know that they're creating better social media content from that video we saw the other week of uh no it doesn't seem to be going great yeah but there's somebody sat down the meeting and said we need gay guys sipping out of straws so i don't know that israel uh israel doesn't seem to understand uh american well i think they understand the money side of american politics i don't think they understand uh the influencing kids side of it but well some of these questions they can't actually answer

Look, part of it, and this is, you know, like I used to use the example, because the 2024 election, really, there was something really fascinating about the, that dynamic, but where you would see, like the Tony Hinchcliff one to me was always a really good example. When MSNBC and CNN went into overdrive about, you know, saying that this was a commentator who made a comment at a Trump speech, you know, and then like, if you had seen the video, is clearly however you felt about the appropriateness of it it was clearly a guy doing a don rickles um roast in every group comedian thing and the video itself had blown up so much i mean the the madison square garden rally was live streamed it had across social media it must have hundreds

of millions of views on it and then some show on msnbc is like a hundred thousand people maybe watching it and they're trying most of your own audience has seen this on their phone already and so So there used to be a dynamic where you had 100 million people, the alternative people, there was no internet, they had like a newsletter or something, they had a few dozen people. And so if you just said it was like this, everyone heard that and no one saw the truth. But now you're trying to play that game when you're the newsletter and they're the mainstream media. And it just doesn't work anymore like that. And there's just a lot, you know, you would just watch like this inability to grapple with the new

landscape and this happens a lot too when you know just just the um accounts like like tom elliott such a great account at this i always just love it's one of the best twitter followers because he would just he'll just make these compilations of what the media was saying like the old game used to be you stay on message and you repeat the same thing over and over and over again and that way if it was said all day on cnn everyone's at least heard it and it's some in some part of your mind if you've heard it a lot, you go, oh yeah, and it's a consensus. You know what I mean? But now one dude like Tom Elliott on his laptop can just cut together a compilation of all of them saying

the exact same thing. It goes super viral. It gets way more views than they're getting on the corporate media. And it exposes them because everyone's going, oh, look, they all got the memo. And now they're all saying the exact same thing. It was sharp as a tech, sharp as attack, sharp as attack. Why did everyone choose that same phrase? That was a coincidence.

You know what I mean? like someone please someone smarter than me who's like a statistician to explain to me what the mathematical odds are that every single person at the corporate media all thought of sharp as attack as the way to describe Joe Biden they all just happen to independently come to that one slogan no there was a memo like clear it's just obvious and so so just for example bring it back to the Netanyahu thing so Netanyahu turns around this is what used to work Rob is that so he comes over here, then the next day he goes and gives a speech in Hebrew, right? Because this is where you always know who Netanyahu's talking to based on whether he's

speaking in English or Hebrew, right? Is he talking to America? Is he talking to Israelis? So he turns around and brags to them, the next day after this, he brags to them that we've achieved all of our objectives, we've gotten it put in writing, and we've got all the Arabs on board. It's the greatest achievement ever. But now you're in an internet world, where that goes supervise.

viral with the translation right underneath it. And so it's just there's it's like the atrophy is part that they were dominant and monopolistically so for so many years. And also there's just this inability to adjust to the new dynamic here. And I think like you said, they just don't really have any arguments to combat this stuff. And so they can't, they don't have the option to play the game the way it's being played now, like to go and win and to go win the argument. And they're just in a very, very tough spot. That's almost 100% of their own making. So it is, yeah, it's something.

All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Tuttle Twins. I'm a huge fan of the Tuttle Twins. You've heard me talk about Mises and Rothbard and Hayek over the years. Well, all of their greatest works are available in children's books from the Tuddle Twins. These are books that were made for kids, but honestly, adult could spend a couple of hours reading through them and walk away with a solid foundation on the core concepts these books are incredible and get this they've sold over six

million copies just imagine the impact that they're going to have in the future these are books that i've read to my children that since the time they were toddlers they have hard toddler books too and they've got great stuff that all the way up uh for older kids as well it's really incredible uh you know they really went after something that's so important which is getting these ideas into the next generation's minds. So I couldn't support this project more. Please go to Tuttle twins.com slash problem and get a deal on the magazine subscription. It's like 50 bucks, seriously. That's the price of a couple of pizzas for a year of mind molding learning for a little one in your life. If you've got kids and you listen to this show, you got to at least go check them out.

Tuttle twins.com slash problem. Tuttle twins.com slash problem. Check them out. Amazing books for children. something I could not support more enthusiastically. I've been a fan of these guys for years, thrilled to have them on as a sponsor. TuttleTwins.com slash problem. All right, let's get back into the show. But anyway, I mean, of course, as it's been the case always, you know, throughout the last few weeks since Charlie was killed,

everybody's trying to kind of manipulate this in their favor and say that this letter really proves this or proves that. To me, it just seems kind of like, it seems to be right in line with what we've been saying since this thing happens, that, oh, yeah, this kind of was the dynamic. Yeah, no, Charlie was probably not about to have some major heel turn on Israel. He was probably still hoping that maybe this genie could be put back in the bottle and maybe there'd be a way that we could get back to, you know, the big tent Republican movement that's going to have super majorities for the next 30 years. But he was clearly struggling with this impossible situation. And it would have been, you know, had he not tragically been killed, it would have been interesting to see what he would have had to do over the next few years.

Because it does seem to be almost like, you know, like Megan Kelly herself said the other day, when she said that nobody under 30 supports Israel anymore. And this is coming from a supporter of Israel. She's just telling you what she's seeing right in front of her. Like no one under 30 is supporting Israel anymore. And okay, no one's an exaggeration. But my God, it's not that much of an exaggeration. And so what are you going to do in that situation after a while?

You got to figure out something. And so anyway, I do think that is a really interesting story. Probably we all should have waited like a couple more months before we even started getting into this story. but Netanyahu started first and immediately politicized it. And then it's like, no, actually, I think we should talk about this then rather than just giving you this kind of talking point. Actually, the situation, the picture that is emerging now doesn't actually look so great for Israel. Like, no, it doesn't exactly look like Israel killed Charlie Kirk, but it certainly doesn't look like anything that makes their image look good. It's like, no, the story is about how young people who don't get their news from the old corporate media, who we all are in agreement, have lied about everything, right?

Now that they don't trust those people, none of them are buying your bullshit. That seems to be the story here, and it's not a particularly good PR story for Israel. Anyway, your thoughts, Rob. Well, yeah, and also just a diplomatic letter to your boss of going, hey, here's my concerns with the organization right now. now, it's really not much of an indicator one way or the other of if he's still totally in line and trying to be like, hey, I need some new marching orders here, or if he's as diplomatically as possible relaying, you're putting me in an unwinnable position here. And we have to make some changes or I can't remain at this company. It's really got either of those two flavors.

well like at the very least it's an uncomfortable letter i mean it's it's a letter where he's he's prefacing it going like now listen friends can always be blunt with friends right okay i've always been loyal but i can only uh this company can only improve if i actually give you my honest criticisms of what i'm transpire here's what i'm hearing i'm hearing you're committing a genocide i'm hearing your real motive here is ethnic cleansing i'm hearing this what is our response to that like at the very least that's an uncomfortable conversation to be having and that you know i think was a look i think it's a i think almost the the thing that's a strange dynamic here is that there is no one i don't think there's not no no one in the public eye who's a staunch defender of

israel who doesn't know that this dynamic exists they all know in nettingahu himself they all know they're getting killed in this PR campaign here. Okay, you know what? We only have a few minutes left, but maybe we should just briefly talk about, maybe we'll spend some more time on this on future episodes, but this also has happened recently, and we have not really talked about this yet on the show, but James Comey was indicted, and this is a major development. James Comey has been indicted for lying under

growth. And it seems to me that he's, um, he's guilty as sin. And I think they've really got him on this. Now it, I, you know, I'm curious what your, your take on this is. But it does, it seems to me that they did, you know, I was talking about this, uh, back if you remember a couple months ago, after the Trump administration buried the Epstein story, covered that up in the most, you know, in the most sloppy way that you've ever seen a political administration try to bury a story that they themselves were fanning the flames of for so many months. It was just an absolute, you know, PR disaster for them. And then they clearly, as an attempt to change the conversation to that pivoted toward rushagate origins of rushagate another very real you know

conspiracy that they were like okay well let's throw the attention onto that and i do think probably there was a feeling that like somebody has to go down for this like we have to be able to point to somebody and say we prosecuted them for this my guess right now is that that is james Comey. He is the guy who the music stopped and is not going to have a seat left for him. That seems to be what it looks like to me. I think this guy's going to end up doing time. I could be wrong about this. But this is what at this point, the fact that they've come this far and actually charged him for this crime, which he is clearly guilty of seems to indicate that to me. I still really don't think they're going to go much further than that into like the origins

of Russia Gate and holding people responsible. I mean, I don't know how exactly they're going to do it. But, you know, the director of national intelligence got on national television and said, we have the proof that Obama committed treason and we've sent it over to the Justice Department. It's very hard to do that and not have someone, somewhere, with somewhat of a name, get punished for that. I really still think it's very hard to believe that they're actually going to go after Obama, even Brennan. But going after Comey is a pretty, that is something. And I got to say, well, I think the administration. is failing in a million ways and I wish they would do a lot more and a lot less depending on what

topic we're talking about. I'm happy to see that. I'm happy to see that. Someone being held accountable for at least something. Now granted, they didn't charge him for conspiring with John Brennan to frame the president of the United States of America for treason. You know what I mean? Like, they didn't charge him for that. But the lie is somewhat related to this. that and you know this is at least something i will say something is better than nothing i have a feeling what we're getting here is something so you stop bitching about the everything that you wanted i will i will take that as the small win that it is your thoughts and then we'll wrap up yeah i uh once again i agree with you i think it's lame that they didn't go after him for

uh worst criminal conduct but yet i think uh you know the congressional hearings are important and people are already able to get away with too much with the I can't talk about that pronguing investigations or I don't remember and so you know it is a crime to lie in front of Congress and I think it's a lie that we should police and so unlike what they went after Trump for I think going after people for crimes that we don't want to see and persecuting people for make this country better it makes sense to go after the guy for now I think this would be some real loser shit if Trump pushed this one through and the prosecutors were saying,

I don't think we actually have enough to go on here, and then they don't actually win this in court. I think that would be a real bad look for the Trump administration. That would be a disaster, for sure. But I think it makes total sense to go after Comey for this. I wish that they went after Comey for more. And there's still a possibility that Merrick Garland and Chris Ray can get in trouble for statements they made about not knowing

if there are any FBI agents on January 6th, because we already knew that there were informants. And now we're finding out that there were, it was like somewhere between 200 and 300 plainclothes officers there on that day. And of course, they weren't provoking. They were just there to observe and very upset with the higher-ups that they were left out to dry and in a bad situation. Already that storyline sounds like this.

You had informants and you had 300 people out there, but you didn't do anything to prevent it. You knew that you needed people out there. And then you also didn't come back and go, yeah, we had people out there and here's what we observed that. So what are they doing out there? The whole like years while you're using this propaganda campaign, that information doesn't come out. But now it's like, oh, yeah, there is that detail. And Merrick Arlen and Chris Ray, I mean, I played clips on a run your mouth, but I think they pretty explicitly said that they had no knowledge of anyone, of any FBI people being there on that day.

And I think that was pretty clearly lying. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, agreed. Agreed. Well, we will see. The more, the better when it comes to prosecuting the deep state. All right. That's it for us. Thank you for listening. Catch you guys tomorrow with Colonel Douglas McGregor. Peace.