The Adam Mockler Show - MAGA Panelist Can't Defend Trump's War

Episode Date: March 11, 2026

Click below for premium Adam Mockler content 👉 https://www.youtube.com/@adammockler/join 👉 https://adammockler.com Adam Mockler with MeidasTouch Network breaks down JOIN THE COMMUNITY: Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/AdamMockler/ Discord: https://discord.gg/y9yzMU3Gff Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/adammockler/ Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/adammockler.com/ Twitter: https://x.com/adammocklerr/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@adammockler Contact: [e-mail] Business inquiries: [e-mail] Adam Mockler - Mockler Media LLC Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

He thinks he needs to do it. You want to know what makes me so angry listening to people like Lindsey Graham and listening to the $1 billion a day toll is that the neocon boomers surrounding Donald Trump are mortgaging my generation's future for another endless, but maybe endless, but another very expensive Middle Eastern War. We tried this with Iraq. We tried this with Afghanistan. It left us in trillions and trillions of dollars in debt.

We pay $1 trillion per year just on the interest for our debt. This is amassing and it's going to affect my generations for decades to come because the old people know they can start wars because young people don't have the power to stop them. So the old people make us foot the bill. And you know what I don't like the most out of all this is the gaslighting. They say that it's fiscally irresponsible for us to invest in health care to us for us to invest at home and my generation of the future. The Affordable Care Act subsidies that they were arguing over were $50 billion. Let's go back to the framing of what we're talking about. They've already asked for $50 billion. So everybody, Adam Ackler here. I just got off

of CNN News Night with Abby Phillip. And this debate over Iran got pretty. intense. You guys should drop a like. Make sure you watch until the end. And if you want more heated debates from the Adam Akler feed, make sure you subscribe below because we have a debate show coming very soon. It will be very great. Check this out. Speaker Mike Johnson has a rhetoric problem on his hands after two of his members made anti-Muslim comments. This week, Congressman Andy Ogles wrote on social media that Muslims don't belong in American society, that pluralism is a lie. And in a post today, he called Muslims barbarians. Congressman Randy Fine is also facing backlash over his post calling for Muslims

to be deported and pushing to denaturalize American citizens. And tonight, Johnson acknowledged speaking with both men, but stopped short of condemning their language. There's a look, there's a lot of energy in the country and a lot of popular sentiment that the demand to impose Sharia law in America is a serious problem. That's what animates this. And that's the language that people use. It's different language than I would use. But I think that that's a serious issue. A few things.

First of all, my grandpa moved from Syria in the early 80s. And my dad's whole side of the family, they are Muslim. So anti-Muslim bigotry has been around for decades and decades. I will say my grandpa who moved here, the Muslim community he lives in Indiana, is full of doctors, heart surgeons, people who have helped their community. I also find it very ironic that Republicans are so well. to any form of bigotry. They're so welcoming to anti-trans bigotry. They're so welcoming to anti-Muslim bigotry. You're making a face, but these are bigoted comments they made. But the moment

that bigotry is targeted towards them, they freak the hell out. You have to stop any bigotry before it enters your movement. I just find it funny when Randy Fine will be super Islamophobic, but then he'll be on the floor whenever something is directed at Jewish people, which, by the way, you should never be bigoted towards anybody. Stop the bigotry before it enters your movement. but how do you only micro focus on certain forms of bigotry? I don't think there's anything any Republican in Congress could do right now that would get condemned by Mike Johnson because the practical thing is he has got a one-vote cushion,

a one-vote margin because Thomas Massey often votes against Republicans. And so, you know, we saw him for the last couple of weeks stay mum and not condemn Tony Gonzalez. make him resign this fact that he had been having an affair with a staffer who ended up dousing herself with gasoline and setting herself on fire and dying. And so there is nothing that any Republican can do right now that Mike Johnson is going to condemn. Is that is that true that Mike Johnson will not draw a line anywhere even here? What Mike Johnson said is he said people who refuse to assimilate and follow a radical ideology that seeks to commit violence and terrorist acts have no business being in the country. I think most people would...

Well, that's not what he was asked about. He was asked about... Most people would agree with that. He was asked about two congressmen who said Muslims have no place in American society. And one of them saying, as Jamil points out, that if it's a choice between dogs and Muslims, it's not a difficult one. He wasn't asked about people with radical ideologies. He was asked about Muslims. But the only reason...

So, obviously, that's a majority of Muslims... I think it is a great tactic to try to answer a different question. then was asked. But the actual question is, is there a line anywhere right now on Capitol Hill or elsewhere in the Republican movement when it comes to anti-Muslim? So I can't speak for Mike Johnson, but I would say we've had two terrorist attacks here in the last 10 days. And can we condemn those? Why are we? Of course. What does that have to do with Muslims? There is a radical strain of Islam that's led to these terrorist attacks. Obviously, the vast majority of People with terroristic ideologies here and all around the world, what does that have to do with whether Muslims belong in American society as a group?

Yeah, let's be clear. I'd like to hear the answer. I'm talking about what Mike Johnson was saying. That's what I'm talking about. I'm talking about what he didn't say. What I'm talking about is what he didn't say. We can be on Islamic extremism without compromising our commitment to religious liberty. As a Muslim Republican who worked for the Bush administration on counterterrorism matters,

I can tell you there are tons of Muslims who oppose Islamic ideology, who oppose ISIS, who oppose throwing bombs in Americans. And the Speaker of the House should just say that. The Speaker of the House should represent the real Republican Party, not the BS Republican Party of Andy Eagles, who's a racist Islamophobe, okay, or the BS Republican Party of Randy Fine, who compares any religious sect to dogs. It's not appropriate.

The Speaker should just say it. Now, it's true. He has a thin margin. He's in a very tough position. It may be hard to say certain things, but it should be easy in this country, in a country that believes in the First Amendment, that believes in the freedom of religion, to say those kind of remarks are wrong. They should be condemned.

It's not a hard thing. Mike Johnson is a smart guy. He's a lawyer. He knows what he's saying. He knows what he's playing games with words. He should stop. And the other thing that he could have said is that people should go take a walk around Arlington Cemetery, and particularly now that we are at war and that Donald Trump is putting

our service members at risk and take a look at all of the tombs at Arlington Cemetery that have a crescent moon for the Muslims that have served and lost their lives for this country. I was going to say really quickly, to build on your point, it's unrealistic to think that Mike Johnson will lead in this capacity

when the person's setting the tone for the entire party is someone posting AI memes of Obama as a gorilla, calling for 100, like the DHS account called for 100 million deportations in America. They clearly have racially biased policies and I think that that's manifesting with a silence around this stuff. We're going to blow the hell out of these people.

We're going to unleash holy hell on them here any minute now. If somebody threatens me and my family multiple times and over 47 years tries to hurt me and my family, I'm going to do something about it. Mr. President, unleashed the American military with Israel on Hezbollah tonight, finish these bastards off, they have American blood on their hands. I go back to South Carolina. I'm asking them to send them. their sons and daughters over to the mid-east.

What I want you to do in the mid-east, our friends and Saudi Arabia and other places, step forward and say, this is my fight too. I join America. You may say he's not a good messenger, but Lindsay Graham spends a hell of a lot of time on the phone and in person with Donald Trump, plays golf with him, and it goes on Fox to give him direct messages, speak to camera, and say, Mr. President, do this and that. And we know that Donald Trump listens to people like Lindsey Graham.

I think he's already. facing a lot of backlash, especially after the Wall Street General report that suggested he was the one to try and push Israel to then persuade Trump. I don't think people are happy with Lindsey Graham right now. Lindsay Graham is still talking every single day and he's still beating the war. Oh, honey, he'll be dead. And listen, but I think it's so fascinating because back in the day, Trump used to call Lindsay Graham and his ilk war mongerers. He used to suggest that it was like Dick Cheney and Lindsey Graham and a cabal together. He now has Lindsey Graham's in his ear every day.

And I think that's what some people are worried about is that the mission creep has already begun. Trump has already shifted from saying that he was anti-war to being very interested in doing whatever he thinks he needs to do. You want to know what makes me so angry listening to people like Lindsey Graham and listening to the $1 billion a day toll is that the neocon boomers surrounding Donald Trump are mortgaging my generation's future for another endless, maybe endless, but another very expensive Middle Eastern War. We tried this with Iraq. We tried this with Afghanistan. It left us in trillions and trillions of dollars in debt. We pay one trillion dollars per year just on the interest for our debt. This is amassing, and it's going to affect my generations for decades to come,

because the old people know they can start wars because young people don't have the power to stop them. So the old people make us foot the bill. And you know what I don't like the most out of all this? Is the gaslighting. They say that it's fiscally irresponsible for us to invest in health care, for us to invest at home and my generation in the future. The Affordable Care Act subsidies that they were arguing over, were $50 billion, $50 billion, and they've already asked for $50 billion.

I can see. I am, you know, from the wing of the party that doesn't ascribe to the Lindsay Graham, you know, let's root and toot and shooting kind of stuff. I just don't believe that. But the thing he said that we didn't put on the TV screen, and I think it's very accurate, is that you can't allow a regime that routinely chanced death to America to have enriched uranium. You can't allow a regime that routinely and often and frequently. But what if they do?

What if they don't get the enriched uranium, which it seems like they acknowledge to lawmakers that they won't? In which case, all of this is for a lot. They're acknowledging that, number one, the bombing raid last year wasn't complete, that the JCPOA was moot, that this country has continuously sought to enrich uranium for weapons purposes over the last 40 years. You cannot let the JCPOA was in blue. The JCPOA was in move. Stop talking. You let this country exist for 40 years where they routinely empowered and financed

their proxies to attack innocent civilians in the entire region. You cannot let this country have a nuclear war. That is the moral justification of the war. Maybe Lindsay Graham shouldn't be... If they don't actually accomplish that objective, then what's the point? That should be the objective. I think that's really where we are right now. I agree that they shouldn't have nuclear weapons,

but it just bothers me that eight months ago, they named us the 12-day war. Maybe that war was contained within 12 days, but we're like 200 days out, and there is still a war going on. So they are just saying that the war is over, and then changing the guidelines, or the goalposts on their justification over and over.

He's talking about the 12-day war, but it's still going. We're talking about catastrophic consequences as a result of what's happening at the Strait of Hormuz. We've now lifted, Trump lifted sanctions on Russia. And so, you know, I feel very bad for Ukraine today. Just think about how much chaos the Trump administration has caused in the past few weeks. They have spiked oil prices.

They've shuttered stock markets across the globe. They posted a tweet today. Our energy secretary, Chris Wright, posted a tweet today saying that a ship was escorted through the Strait of Hormuz, and he deleted it within 10 minutes, which just, like, absolutely blew up markets across the globe. Donald Trump has made the world more catastrophic after saying that he would be America first, anti-interventionalist. He said that he was a populist, make America great again person. But instead, Russia now has more ability to not only kill Ukrainians, but to target or to help Iran target U.S. troops. We saw eight U.S. troops die. Hold up. We saw eight U.S. troops die.

And when we learn that Russia is providing Iran with intelligence, this administration is apathetic to it. They're like, oh, they're not doing as good of a job as they could. They said that Russia might not, what do they say? Russia isn't doing a good job helping Iran because Iran's not doing well. They're just apathetic to the fact that... If Iran is denied a nuclear weapon, is that a good thing or a bad thing? Of course. It's a good thing.

Of course. So is it worth taking some strategic risk? Is it worth taking some economic risk to achieve that good? I'm going to take problem with the word strategic. There was no strategy from this. Listen, is it worth it worth? How do you know? One minute ago.

Are you on the phone? Are you got with Pete Hedgef on that phone? I'm not, I mean, it's funny to me that one minute ago you said Senator Chris Murphy was not trustworthy, but in your mind, Pete Hedgef is not partisan. Okay, but in your mind, Pete Hedgef is not partisan? And left a classified briefing just to come out and poop on the American. Is Donald Trump partisan and his rhetoric around this? Is Pete Hegseth, is Lindsey Graham? I can point to anyone in this administration that is leading this effort, and they are hyperpartisan and they're honestly making us look bad.

We, Americans should be terrified about this. Lydia.