Raging Moderates with Scott Galloway and Jessica Tarlov - Trump Threatens to WIPE OUT Iran and Triggers 25th Amendment Calls (ft. Katie Phang)

Episode Date: April 7, 2026

Big news! We’ve just been nominated for a Webby Award for Best News & Politics Podcast! Now it’s time to bring it home — and we need your help.  Cast your vote HERE: https://wbby.co/57448N Jessica Tarlov sits down with attorney and MeidasTouch host Katie Phang to break down Trump’s latest escalation with Iran — his 8:00 P.M. deadline, threats to strike civilian infrastructure, and the very real question of whether this is brinkmanship... or something much worse. They talk through what happens next, whether there’s any credible off-ramp, and how seriously to take Iran’s reported 10-point peace proposal. Plus, Trump goes even further on NATO, Vice President JD Vance heads to Hungary to boost Viktor Orbán, and the MAGA reaction — from Tucker Carlson to Megyn Kelly — shows just how fractured the right is at this moment.  Meanwhile, calls for the 25th Amendment are getting louder — and they're not just coming from Democrats. And finally, Katie and Jessica break down historian Timothy Snyder's theory about Trump's latest military budget... and why it might be an attempt at a coup. Follow Jessica Tarlov, @JessicaTarlov  Follow Prof G, @profgalloway  Follow Raging Moderates, @RagingModeratesPod  Subscribe to our YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@RagingModerates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Where does President Trump's speech leave us with regard to where the war is heading? And it really was, to me, the story of the commander-in-chief who weeks into this war is deeply uncertain about how it ends. I'm John Feiner, co-host of the Long-game podcast. This week, Jake Sullivan and I break down the president's speech and discuss what it's like to negotiate with the Iranians. We will also debate whether Iran should accept a deal. The episode is out now. Search and follow The Long Game, where we're a lot. wherever you get your podcasts. Aren't we at a moment, Jess, where we are literally living on the extremes? We are 100% living, like, on the edges of everything.

Footnote, apparently we did do this for regime change, which everybody denied in this administration from day one. But I guess now the latest excuse, according to this press for yesterday, was we've successfully achieved regime change, which, again, nobody ever said what was the plan, the purpose, or the goals behind going into this war. Is it just a handful of autocrats want to be dictators like Trump and Orban and others that get to divvy up the world? Is that it? I mean, it's so, to me, frustrating that we just have these very small men with very big dreams, with very powerful weapons that are carving up our world.

Welcome to Raging Moderates. I'm Jessica Tarlov, and today I'm very lucky to be joined by a very powerful weapon. attorney and host of the Katie Fang show on the Midas Touch Network, Katie Fang. Thank you for coming back. It's been a while. It's been too long. And I figured if there was anybody with whom I could spend end of day as way, there would be Jess Tarloff. So I'm happy to be here. I was thinking of that. What was that movie? A friend for the end of the world? Yes. That is totally like, I don't even know, you know? It's like, is it wrong for me to be laughing? Shouldn't be laughing. But this is just absurd. Like you just kind of have to like chuckle your way through it.

Right. I guess so. Or until 8 p.m. when we see if something actually happens or if it's another round of taco. I've been calling it Taco Tuesdays. Taco Tuesdays. Kind of perfect. Okay. All right. I'm going to set the table because we already got to the conclusion. But in case you had noticed, President Trump is warning that a whole civilization could be wiped out if Tehran doesn't open the straight of Hormuz by his deadline of 8 p.m. tonight.

Set your calendars, your alarms, whatever you need to do. In a social media post just hours before that cutoff, he said a whole civilization will die tonight while still holding out faint hope that something, quote, revolutionarily, wonderful, could prevent the strikes. Trump's also threatened to decimate Iran's bridges and shut down its power grid, moves that could constitute war crimes. Iran, for its part, is vowing crushing and extensive retaliation of civilian infrastructure is hit, and despite a reported 10-point proposal from Iran to end the conflict, seems like there's no sign of a breakthrough before tonight's deadline.

Let's watch this clip from Trump's presser yesterday. The entire country can be taken out in one night, and that night might be to me. tomorrow night. Short clip, but to the point, what do you think is going to happen this evening? I don't think the United States is going to annihilate the people of Iran. I mean, doesn't that kind of defeat the whole purpose? It's like you want the people of Iran to do something revolutionarily wonderful, but then, hey, we're just going to take you all out in the same stroke.

I just, I do think it's a Taco Tuesday. I do find it to be alarming, though, that, again, we can chuckle through a Taco Tuesday where you have a man who has the control over the nuclear codes saying that he's going to eliminate an entire country in one fell swoop. I find it to be remarkable more so that there is, are there literally no adults ever left in this administration? I mean, you look at what he posted on Easter Sunday of all days, of all days to post, and then you look at, listen, I, and I know that you used to work with him,

but I don't think P. Hague-Hig Seth is ever going to reign in Trump. Pete Hegsess bloodlust, I think, exceeds Donald Trump. This is a say what you want about Pete Hegsess show. Oh. Go. Yeah. So there's no morality. There's no caution.

There's no discretion. There's no measure in Hegseth. So, I mean, if there was ever anybody who was, I think, like the chef's kiss match for Trump when it comes to having an appointment, like a cabinet appointment, like a secretary of defense, it was definitely Hegseth. But what's more crazy? The fact that Trump posted. what he posts and says what he says, or the fact that somebody doesn't stop him from doing it and

somebody doesn't tell him to take it down or people don't quit over it. I mean, there has to be an off-ramp to the Looney Tunes moment that seems to be repeating itself day in and day out. But I find it also very upsetting because this is not just a United States-Iran thing. We've got Israel involved. We have other countries in the Middle East region that are involved. And so it's, you know, one life lost is one life lost too many. And what upsets me is that we're just going to watch the day come and go. And then people are going to wake up on Wednesday morning. And he will not have bombed around into the Stone Ages.

And then we're all just going to kind of move on. I'm kind of at my end on that tolerance level, I think. Yeah, I think that there are bridges that we are crossing that because of the deluge, deluge, I should say, of information all the time. Delusional deluge. Yeah. The delusional deluge. we're not really taking stock of the fact that you're talking about a country with over 90 million people on it.

Yes. Right. This is no small threat. And I'm not sure how seriously Iran takes it. I mean, their social media would indicate that they know that this is a meme game more than a bomb's game. And we should note that at the same time that this was going on, there was another U.S. military attack on Karga Island, which appears to be more of a double tap than something new. it was just us. Israel was not affiliated with this particular move, but that signals a very different approach than we're going to bomb you into the Stone Age, right? That's more targeted and about the

oil. And I keep going back to, I guess, two things. One about the adults in the room. I think that General Kane seems like an adult in the room, even though he always gets pushed to the side and ignored in the press conferences, like when... But yesterday, Kane, disappointingly, was kissing his ass. Like that was, you always have to kiss the ass. No, no, no. I, I think that there has to be, why? Because then you're going to lose your job. And I think that people who serve in these capacities and have the chance to rein it in when it actually counts, if it looks like public flattery, but they have some sort of moderating force in there versus another version of a Heggsath coming up, like Dan Driscoll as well, the one that Hexseth is so concerned is going to get his job if he does get pushed out as the Secretary of Defense.

I can handle some ass kissing in a press conference if I know that the situation room isn't just Donald Trump, Stephen Miller, and Pete Heggseth. That's how I feel. But that also presupposes just that Trump will listen to Kane and that Hegseff will listen to Kane. What I heard yesterday from Kane was our dear cult leader commander in chief, is so amazing. And what disturbed me was, Kane saying, this man, as in Trump, delivers on his promises. And I understand he was talking in the context of rescuing our downed service members, which I want to make clear, the level of heroism that is involved from people in our armed services right now is stunningly amazing. And I don't ever want to sound like I don't support

our armed services. But when Kane says something like this man, keeps his promises. Then you couple it with what we're seeing. I get very worried about Kane giving any accolades to Trump. He could just get up and he could deliver the information that he should be delivering to the American people that we're not really getting from this administration. And instead, the flattery is very North Korean. It's very gross. Hard pass. I don't think that's a part of your job requirement. Sure. But like, it is part of your job requirement to survive this administration. And does he need to? Like, does he need to? Like, Does he have to?

I don't know. Do we need a situation room that is in Marlago and it's Donald Trump, Stephen Miller, Pete Hagsas. It's next to the buffet brunch. Yeah, I know. 100%. There's a black curtain up for some privacy. There are Apple watches. Apple watches everywhere.

With an Apple watch, right? And there's not a legit general insight. So I'm going to take the ass kissing general. Okay. Versus that alternative. But I understand your standards are perhaps higher. than mine, and maybe I'm a little conservative media coded and how I'm looking at this. No, but maybe I'm not being realistic. And I understand, but I do think, aren't we at a moment,

Jess, where we are literally living on the extremes? Like, I feel like we live on the edges now. Like, we are 100% living, like, on the edges of everything. And if we are living in that extreme lands, and I feel like the extreme would be, if Kane doesn't agree, then Kane shouldn't be there. And I don't mean, like, I wanted them to have green khaki uniforms. versus blue. I'm talking like, this is wrong, everything I'm seeing is wrong, or it's too gray. We're too in the gray on this one. I'm not comfortable. I feel like it's the imprimmiter of credibility that makes me worried by somebody like Dan Cain. Okay. Halfway towards where you are, and I wanted to talk about J.D. Vance, who seems to be playing more of an interesting role than I expected in this.

So he's in Hungary to campaign for Victor Orban, which deserves me on a whole host of other levels. But apparently he is a linchpin of these negotiations. And the Iranians think that J.D. Vance is the right person to be talking to. Do you think that there is a chance at all of some sort of diplomatic resolution? I understand why the Iranians want a real deal versus a 45-day ceasefire. and they've looked at the example of what's gone on in Palestine, for instance, and said, like, that's not going to be good enough for this. Do you think that there's any shot at this? Or, like, how does it end, I guess? Well, I do think, and I wanted to make sure that I could speak intelligently about this.

I find, though, the, quote, end of Israeli strikes against Hezbollah in Lebanon being a non-starter for an end-end. And that's why I understand J.D. Vance, if you could take a beat and stop kissing Victor Orban's ass long enough to maybe help the United States end an unconstitutional and an illegal war, that would be fantastic. But then doesn't J.D. Vance have to consult with B.B. Netanyahu to get his green light on any deal? I feel like it's a very, it's a thruple. Is it not? It's Iran, U.S. and Israel. It's not just U.S. in Iran. And this thruple is getting very crowded. and it's a lot of, you know, energy here. And I just don't know if the U.S. could actually make a deal without Israel blessing it or however that would go. Oh, I think that that's completely correct. I'm not saying that this is the deal that will get accepted. But it is interesting to see at least a pullback of some of the more outlandish request, at least of the United States, like giving up, you know, U.S. bases in the Gulf,

which was obviously going to be a non-starter for us. I don't know, maybe I'm just too glass-half-full about General Kane and the chances of there being some sort of resolution. But I like to think that it is possible. And I do find J.D. Vance to be an interesting player in this because he was siloed. Then he became a focal point. Then he was siloed again and sent out, like he was on the campaign trail talking about prices. The only one acknowledging that prices were up. Now he's in Hungary and could be the point person on a negotiation.

like, it's an odd place for a vice president to be. So what I do find to be even more odd is J.D. Vance is very publicly backing an autocrat in Hungary, right? It is a foregone conclusion. Orban's looking at some serious trouble so they had to call in the reinforcements by way of J.D. Vance. Why is Trump not there? I don't know. Is there some protocol where the president doesn't travel internationally when he's illegally in a war? I have no idea. But Vance being there, openly backing an autocrat and the shift that Orban does, some would say, is pretty bad like what Iran does to its people, right? Like in terms of the Iran Revolutionary Guard, et cetera, right? Well, I'll say old school Iran. Footnote, apparently we did do this for regime change, which everybody denied in this administration from day one,

because you really can't be going in for regime change without congressional authorization for shit. But I guess now the latest excuse, according to this pressure yesterday, was we've successfully achieved regime change, which, again, nobody ever said what was the plan, the purpose, or the goals behind going into this war. But isn't it so funny then? Because diplomacy ends up being a weird thing, does it not just? Because how do you define that? Is it just a handful of autocrats want to be dictators like Trump and Orleans? and others that get to divvy up the world, Putin.

Is that it? Because sending Vance as some type of emissary to resolve this, because when you look at something like Israel has to stop strikes on Hezbollah, actually, Hezbollah is bad. So you know what? Maybe we shouldn't have Hezbollah or Hamas, right? But why? That shows Iran is also not necessarily operating good faith.

So do we really have a regime change? Right. I mean, it's so, to me, frustrating that we just have these very small men with very big dreams, with very powerful weapons that are carving up our world. And that is why you're looking at Vance, who's just a yes man. He's never going to say anything that's anti what Trump wants because that defeats Vance's own purpose. You're not going to get it from Hegseth.

You're not going to get it from Rubio. You're not going to get it from Gabbard as long as she lasts, right? You're not getting it from Cain per se, although I'm not privy to the confidentiality of those conversations. You're not getting it from allies because the allies are meeting without the United States to figure out a way to open the Strait of Hormuz in a way that will not decimate their global economies. And the United States, again, thinking that pulling out of NATO makes sense because he's pissed off he didn't fucking get Greenland. I mean, this is how out of the world these conversations are. But I don't think Vance is necessarily going to have an original thought going into any of this. I don't think he's going to have the negotiation skills that is going to land this plane.

Oh, I didn't say that necessarily. The skills, though, compared to Steve Whitkoff, who didn't even understand what an enrichment proposal actually looked like. Where's Jared? Well, I think Jared and Steve are plane hopping, I guess, around the region. Or maybe they're just in Miami. Looking forward. real estate investments. Is that what we're looking for?

Gaza Lago still on the way. But some of the criticisms that you just brought up, we actually are also hearing from Tucker Carlson and I wanted to play a clip of him for you. This is a mockery, not just of Islam, it's a mockery of Christianity. To send out a tweet with the F word on Easter morning promising the murder of civilians and then saying praise be to Allah without explaining any of it, you are mocking me and every other Christian because we're Christians. We can't support that.

That is evil. That is an intentional desecration of beauty and truth. Were you surprised to hear Tucker going that hard? No. Not surprised. Almost relieved in a way that somebody actually was standing up for Christianity on Sunday. Because, again, no one around Trump is the adult to tell him, Mr. President, we don't post stuff like that on Easter Sunday.

And we certainly don't use it. an F-bomb on Easter Sunday. Whether you're a Christian or not, there is a decorum that is lacking, which ironically, I think it was the Iranian embassy of Zimbabwe that posted about what presidential decorum is supposed to look like. But no, I wasn't surprised. Happy to see that somebody actually says that. I agree with Tucker Carlson as like my hair lights on fire. That's not what you do. But is he more angry about the post, the truth social posts and the fact that it happened on Easter Sunday? Or is he angry about the fundamentals of a man who should not have control over the nuclear codes threatening what he's been threatening, which, by the way, today was annihilating Iran,

but we've had this in days leading up, have we not just? We've had the threats against desalination plants, power plants, nuclear plans, bridges. Isn't today supposed to be bridge day? It is bridge day, right? It's Tuesday. And power plant there. Yeah, and power plant day. I mean, this is war crime day. Let's just call it war crime day. Or is it going to be war. crime Wednesday because he'd talk about on Tuesday and then roll it into Wednesday. Who knows? But I was glad Tucker Carlson said it. And the power behind Tucker's voice, as we know, is he reaches a lot of people. Now, the question is, are people more angry about a bad truth social post on the holy of days of Easter Sunday? Are they mad about Trump spending one to two, you know, billion dollars a day on a war that

nobody really wants us to be in, despite what Trump says? If you aren't already, make sure to subscribe to our YouTube page to stay in the loop on all political news. Okay, let's take a break. Stay with us. When West Jet first took flight in 1996, the vibes were a bit different. People thought denim on denim was peak fashion, inline skates were everywhere, and two out of three women rocked, the Rachel. While those things stayed in the 90s, one thing that hasn't is that fuzzy feeling you get

when WestJet welcomes you on board. Here's to Westjetting since 96. Travel back in time with us and actually travel with us at westjet.com slash 30 years. Hi, I'm Bray Brown. And I'm Adam Grant. And we're here to invite you to The Curiosity Shop. A podcast that's a place for listening, wondering, thinking, feeling, and questioning. It's going to be fun.

We rarely agree. But we almost never disagree. And we're always learning. That's true. You can subscribe to the Curiosity Shop on YouTube or follow in your favorite podcast app to automatically receive new episodes every Thursday. For the last 10 years, everything in American politics, has basically revolved around one man.

And as a political journalist who came of age during Donald Trump's rise in 2016, I've had a front row seat. I am officially running for president of the United States. It's going to be only America first. America first. Thousands of supporters of President Trump stormed the U.S. capsule building.

But is it possible to talk about politics without talking about Donald Trump? That's the question I'm going to ask in our new show from Vox. The idea of like a post-Trump or not exactly Trump-focused show can exist because he's not really driving any agenda items. It really does feel like so reactive.

You know, I think this Iran thing is also going to cause a big split in the GOP. So far it doesn't among like, people who say their MAGA voters are still with Trump. But like, for the first time, you see on a major issue, open opposition from the start of this war. I'm a Sted Herndon.

And welcome to America, actually. Welcome back. What I'm curious about, I guess, most of all, with, like, what Tucker Carlson is saying, and then even some of the criticisms coming from Megan Kelly, who then went back and said, like, I'm voting Republican no matter what, right? Like, you could drop a nuclear bomb, and I'm still voting Republican. So how serious is some of this purported flipping or dissatisfaction with Trump from the Tucker Carlson's at the world?

because, you know, Tucker is primarily motivated by clicks and dollars, right? Like, that's how the outrage machine works, absolutely. But I do think seeing someone who is more of a pop culture figure than certainly a religious figure. Oh, because, gosh forbid, the Pope actually call us out for what we're doing, right? Gosh forbid, the actually man closest to God. You know, he's kind of the authority. Is he not on what God would be thinking here? And he said, this is not working for you.

But yeah, I agree. Sorry to interrupt. But yeah, I mean, he is more of a pop culture figure than anything at this point. And the Christianity angle is a little bit different for him. I mean, that's stuff that you hear from, you know, evangelicals who couldn't abide by Trump from way back in the Access Hollywood tapes. You hear this from Democrats making that criticism about, you know, what Christianity is actually about, you know, helping the poor, helping immigrants, you know, everything that James Talleyico, et cetera, is talking about. And so it did feel either like a very strategic maneuver because there are more dollars to be made if you go with this angle. or that there is something actually brewing. And then by extension, and I want your legal mind on this, there is a lot of chatter about the 25th Amendment now. And it is not just Democrats that are doing it. I hate to just like pelt you with clips. But Alex Jones, someone who also needs the dollars,

but he was going off about this as well. So let's look at him. Yeah. How do we 25th Amendment is that's ask? The problem is to get the 25th Amendment's harder than impeachment. You have to get two thirds of the House and two thirds of the Senate. So what do we do? Tackle Trump and pretend, let him pretend he's president and publicly report that he's going through a health issue and Vance takeover.

It literally needs to be something like that. It's that bad. I've known you a long time. You've never called for a internal coup before. Ever, ever, ever. But that's how dangerous this is. That's how risky it is for the whole world. Yeah, if I was the Democrats, I'd stop poking Trump and messing with.

That only makes it worse. Like, you guys need to watch out. What is going on? Yeah. Yeah, I'm like, I mean, I'm not going to take advice from Alex Jones as a Democrat as to what I should and should not be doing. An internal coup fascinating. I find it to be a plot of a really good Netflix series, right? Like, let's put a kind of like the Melania has like a stage Melania, right?

Let's put a statue. I really, how do you get out? What's the casting call for the fake Donald Trump, Jessica? Really? What is that going to look like? Like the Timothy Chamalais in Washington Square Park. Yes, right? But so you host a fake Trump who's going through a health thing,

but he's really just bound and gagged in the situation room in the corner, and we don't let him out. But Trump already embodies the crazy uncle in the closet anyway, energy. So I kind of fit that. I guess that works. You just shove him in the closet. Look. Alex Jones, again, is the clickbait guy, as you said with Tucker.

A lot of it is performative. I also think with somebody like Tucker, for the record, he did say, I still love him no matter what he says about me. That's what Tucker said about Trump, right? Alex Jones is interesting, though, because I find impeachment and Section 4 25th Amendment I've said on my own channel, these are not mutually exclusive goals, Jeff. You can have it all. Why limit ourselves to the crumbs of just impeachment? you can pursue Section 425 Amendment.

I actually think J.D. Vance has it in him to do this. And I posited yesterday on my show that the reason why is it is ironically the fastest and the most constitutional way for J.D. Vance to get into the Oval Office, which we all know is end game for Jady. End game is Oval. And instead of having to wait until 2029 to do so, as he thinks, he could do it now in the throes of 2026, maybe help the Republicans in the November midterms by having new blood, fresh face and somebody's not going to hit the fucking button to end the world in nuclear war.

Jada Vance could get there by way of Section 4. You know, Section 1 is Trump dying, again, a possibility. But right now, Section 4 is an option. I just don't know if the cabinet, it's a majority of the cabinet level executive department officers that has to help J.D. Vance get there. It can't just be Jady on his own. So let me be very clear. Not only is the threshold of votes from both Chambers High, but in even order to get the mini deposing of Trump in the meantime, you need J.D. Vance and the majority of the cabinet-level executive department officers. And I just don't know if Heggseth, Rubio, and others are going to have the energy to do it. So if it was just J.D., I think this would have happened before now. I also think that part of the reason why there are no adults that are curbing Trump is a J.D. Vance palace intrigue kind of thing.

I think people know that if Trump steps in it enough, then maybe some people would support the idea that this effort is crazy. Not crazy like a fox, but just fucking crazy. And that's why Vance would be the appropriate heir apparent to what's going on. I also think sending Vance on an international diplomacy thing like going to Victor Orban is also another kind of we're blessing you for a role. I mean, there's a lot of stuff that happens, I'm sure, behind the scenes about which we have no idea. But I don't think it's. It's a coincidence that Vance signed on as VP to Trump because Vance knew that there is a very real possibility that the 25th Amendment by hook or by crook would get him into the Oval. I, that's so interesting that you think that because, I mean, it stands also in contrast to the idea that he couldn't even get a diplomatic solution, right? And he's kind of like the guest man that gets sent around. And I know that there's a maniacal side to him. Like, you don't go from hillbilly allergy is Trump, America's Hitler, to I want to be vice president. president and have complete fealty to this man without their being. He is the epitome of Machiavellian energy, Jess.

I don't think it's a coincidence. His wife is pregnant right now. How great is it to have a young baby in the White House? I mean, come on. It is like in my, and I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I do believe that there were a lot of machinations that went into this Jess that was not just he would look like a good VP candidate. Well, definitely Netflix bound.

Right? I want to ask you a strategic question that I want to talk to you about Timothy Snyder's theory about the defense budget and a coup that could be coming. But firstly on the strategy. So you just said we could have it all, right? You could have impeachment and you can have 25th Amendment. And as a democratic strategist and someone that has to live in a conservative media environment, I've been really down on the idea of talking about this stuff. Because I think that- Well, I think that when people- go to vote, they look at their grocery bill more than they are listening to conversations about impeachment. And the president and his allies and the Republican Party, I should say, just writ large, has been very successful in weaponizing our weaponizing. Okay. Right. And there are even Mike Johnson is out there saying, if Democrats get in, they're going to impeach President Trump. Now, like, don't tempt me with a good time, right? but there are a lot of people that are not interested in any more what they perceive as lawfare.

They're just looking to have health care that they can afford that's decent to be able to send their kids to a good school, be able to pay for groceries and maybe get to Disney World. All of which has been taken away by the Republicans. 100. Right. So that is my point. So that message to me is one that resonates across all 50 states. But why can't we have, why can't we do both? Like, why can we not have that conversation about the ask for more money for this war when people can't afford their gas or their health insurance or their chicken? I am totally here for both conversations.

That one, I guess, just like my 1A option and then my 1B option. Because the Republicans, and this has been a problem with Democratic communications since the Obama era, we're not that good at it on a comparative basis. and they are very effective in taking something that might be our 1B or our number two or three or four or fifth point. I mean, they made an entire election seemingly about culture war stuff, right, where they're saying like they're going to. Yeah, war and woke. Yeah. Exactly. Which had an economic undertone to it in the they, them add.

But it still was very resonant with people. Yeah. And look, I don't just, I agree that there has, I think that the Democrats have historically suffered from. a we have so many great ideas, we want to put them all out there, and sometimes that spaghetti on the wall theory doesn't always work, right? Because only some things stick and some things don't. I do think that there has been a very good move by the Democrats as far back as July of 2025 for the big bullshit bill to really frame the affordability issues in a way that all makes sense, because Trump is really making it clear. His one and a half million, one and a half trillion

dollar ask for military spend is going to hurt us in small business administration, disaster response, loan issues, education, health care, low income housing, health care, cancer research, Alzheimer research. I mean, and if you know that the reason why he's doing that is to build up his military, when he parks the military everywhere and every corner of your life, especially vis-a-vis the elections, it's because he had the money to do it, right? He built it up so big. When he gives a boost like he wants to give in that $1.5 trillion, Jess, he wants to give the Department of Justice like $40 billion or some shit, like something crazy. He wants to give cash freaking Patel, of all people, like $11 billion. That guy has no business having $11 billion. So if you think about how it's a

literally stealing from Peter to feed Paul, and Paul's the only one who is living in the Trump family, because he's not doing it for all Republicans to help them. He's only doing it to help himself and his family and his billionaire buddies. I do think the things have now become inextricably intertwined. I think affordability and impeachment slash get the crazy guy out of the office slash, we need better representation. I think democracy is a good thing. I think those things can actually live together and not be fighting against each other. I don't think they have to be yin-yank on that. Okay. And then by extension, what do you think of our pal, Timothy Snyder, an amazing historian friend of the pod, is putting out there about this budget. That essentially

it's a way to curry favor with the military so that when the time comes to hold on to control, even after an election that says that you should be out, that Trump will be in charge. still on a permanent or at least semi-permanent basis. 100%. And I think Professor Snyder knows what the hell he's talking about because he's seeing it happen in history. It's a proven, there's evidentiary proof that that's how you do it. It is no coincidence, Jess, that his very first appointment, Trump's very first appointment

was who, Pete Hexeth. That was his very first one. Of all the cabinet positions, it was Pete Hegg-Seth, the Secretary of Defense. And there's a reason why Trump has also kind of superficially wanted the military parade for his birthday, right? Like, he wanted to be able to do that. He has always wanted that type of intimacy in terms of his office and the military. Because in his mind, he has seen other countries successfully stay in power because they've had military or, for example, revolutionary guard. I mean, you have people that are armed to the teeth, loaded forbearer. that are there to serve only one.

Now, I would say, and I think we started this conversation with me saying thank you, as well as I appreciate our armed services right now, especially. I do think, though, that is a gross, gross miscalculation of our military. I do think it. And I do think that there are people that are not as public as maybe a Dan Gain and others that are stalwart defenders of my job was never seen. supposed to be politicized. My role as a soldier was never to serve one man. It was to serve an entire country. And that's why my oath has never been to the president of the United States,

but to the people, right, to the country of the United States. And so I do think that if Trump thinks boosting his military budget is going to make that much of a difference, I think he's sorely mistaken. Well, I said it when it happened. I'll say it again. Folks like Admiral Holsey, who left Southern Command when we started shooting those boats in the Caribbean. Those are the types of people that we need to be hearing from so that we can understand a bit more about the dynamics within the Pentagon and what people are being asked to do in terms of violating their oath to the U.S. Constitution, not to Donald Trump. Katie Fang, always a blast to have you. Thank you. Thanks for having me, Jeff. Before we go, another reminder that not only is raging moderates five days a week, we're also available.

on substack. Subscribers get ad-free episodes, which I know you all love, live streams, a place to connect with me, the Profji team in general, which includes Scott. Plus, we got access to the new Raging Moderates newsletter, the Monday Rage. Our first one was out yesterday. Did you like it? Find us at Raging Moderates.com.com. And we've got our Webby Award for Best News and Politics podcast. I'm going to ask you again. If you haven't voted, please do vote.Webbyawards.com. If you've already voted, consider doing it again or like getting your mom or your dad or boyfriend, girlfriend, whoever. Just people should be voting for us. That's all for this episode.

Thank you so much for joining.