The Adam Mockler Show - Trump Lets His Natalie Secret SLIP OUT

Episode Date: October 6, 2026

It's a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe. They can take out a city. Let him take out Los Angeles. Let them take out San Diego. That's, this is a very small price to pay. That is absolutely deranged coming from the president of the United States. All right, everybody, we have some wild news to run through and no time to waste. It was very easy to miss Donald Trump's awkward interaction with his top aide, Natalie Harp,

on stage in Nebraska yesterday. The reason it was easy to miss is because this clip was overshadowed by one of the most viral Trump moments in a while. In this clip of Donald Trump, he's talking about the cost of the Iran war and he casually suggests that Iran could take out Los Angeles. Let them take out Los Angeles. He says, let them take out San Diego. He says, this is a very small price to pay.

Not only is this clip terrifying for multiple reasons. Not only is Trump losing control of the Iran war as the costs increase, more U.S. troops die, and we are now stuck in another forever war where the mission is ever expanding. But on top of all of that, this statement has become controversial, as many respected figures and journalists are saying, Trump didn't really mean what he said there. We have people that I even like, like Aaron Blake, or Daniel Dale of CNN, who is the fact-checker guy. And they're saying, hey, I think Trump just missed up some war. words. No, F that. We are going to do a deep dive on this clip. We are going to watch it and we are going

to see exactly what Donald Trump meant. First, let me just back up and show you some other moments from this same rally before it gets apocalypticly genocidal. Trump is casually suggesting that Los Angeles could get nuked or that San Diego could get nuked. And the scariest part is the crowd is cheering as he is saying this. So I want to show you this first clip of Donald Trump making zero sense, totally incoherent, saying you need to be a student at the top of your class at MIT to turn on a lawnmower nowadays. But I got rid of all that stuff. You can now have a lawnmower. Genuinely, does anyone know what this means? You need to be a student at the top of your class at MIT to turn on a lawnmower nowadays,

you know? But I got rid of all that stuff. Now you can have a lawnmower. Why did he have to do that motion at the end? PUMB. Let me play this again for you. We didn't need a visualization of a Trump, but I'm glad he got rid of all that stuff. This meme then popped up in my feed. How did you start that with a PhD from MIT while he's yelling at this kid? On a serious note, I have no effing clue what this means, and I'd wager 90% of the crowd didn't

know either, but they were just cheering it on. This might be something about DEI or something about wokeness. I really don't know. In this clip, as Aaron Rupar points out, Donald Trump calls his top aide Natalie Harp on stage, clearly checks out her legs for a while she's walking away. He clearly is staring directly at her legs, as I'll show you in just one moment. And then he floats creating a reality show with her, which in my eyes is Trump's primary love language.

If he wants a reality show with you, then you're not going to leave his life. Take a look at this moment. Dog, what are they even cheering at here? What executive order did he just sign? To change another lake name? What is this? To, like, redact more Epstein files? This is nothing of substance.

It's interesting. You can see Trump take a look at her legs multiple times in this clip. She reminds you, like, the price is right. Thank you, Natalie. Come on. This perfect person comes up, hands it, walks up. We should go on television with this show, right? I mean, I think that considering the fact Natalie Harp has written you letters saying,

you are all that matters to me, and Trump has said Natalie will never leave my side, there may be something to this, something deeper to this. Before I jump in to Donald Trump being laissez-faire about Iran, nuking America, being apocalyptic, I want to show you how threatened he is by Michigan Senate candidate Abdul-L. Syed. Donald Trump freaks out on Fox News. He doesn't even name the station because he's pissed at them for doing an interview with Abdul El-Sayed that went super viral. Someone said, this is the best I've seen a Democrat do on Fox.

Too many Democrats try to be nerds and cram in every fact and cram in every stat. But Abdul simplifies it and says there was no war before and now there is a war. And the host immediately tries to start talking over him because, you know, they're losing. So I want to show you this moment of Trump. Or middle and right. They're always putting, like El Cyanad was interviewed just a little while ago on a certain network. I won't tell you which one. They let this guy talk, talk, talk.

They hardly fight him at all. Why are they putting these people on our television networks? Why? They always have to put Jessica Tarloff, another loser. They put, they put, no, they put these voices on. And, you know, some of our guys defend, a lot of our guys don't defend. because I want to get on to the next question. And it's really bad.

I think it's really bad. I think it's... This is the whiniest shit ever. I'm so sorry. It's incredibly whiny. He's like, the network that won't be named. Why do they have to have these people on? Sir, the president of the United States

is not supposed to be unilaterally controlling who's on networks or even giving commentary about it. Was Obama relentlessly tweeting about Tucker Carlson back in 2011? I really don't think so. This is deranged. This is crazy. And this brings me to the Abdul El-Sayyat clip where he rolls through a Fox News host. As that tweet read before, he's not trying to cram in as many stats.

He's just being accessible. He is communicating like a human being, which many Democrats lack. And as always, if you appreciate these videos, make sure you drop a like. Make sure you subscribe to the Adam Mockler feed with post notifications on. We are building a movement here, the fastest growing political channel hosted by a Gen Z person. It's all because of you guys. So thank you. And check this out.

like the war in Iran right now. Why are we fighting this war? To what end? Who benefits from it? Why do we do this? What are we paying for it? Because Iran created a huge threat. To the neighborhood, they killed thousands of American citizens.

You know, you and I both know. You go back to the Bay Root bombing at the Marine barracks in the early 1980s. But the threat, the threat had been contained, the big threat, the nuclear threat. So the challenge is this. Well, I haven't heard Pete Hacks at war. They had been breaking the JCPOA, you know, by many, They had been breaking them. By estimations that people liked the cherry pick, sure.

But we had contained that threat when President Obama was president. And then Donald Trump came and tore that agreement up. And then in his second administration, created a war that people in the state of Michigan are now paying for at the grocery checkout counter, at the pump for gas, in our tax dollars. And then you ask yourself, does more war make us actually safer? And I think the argument that we continue to need to learn is that less war in the world is usually safer. Well, obviously, all these times, I just want to go back to the issue.

Martha, I hadn't finished my point. I just want to finish what I was saying. We're in a situation right now where we could have chosen peace, and instead we chose war. And now you've got a situation at the Strait of Hermuz where we can't move oil and gas. The price of energy has gone away up. I'm sorry, I got to jump in there. That's not true. What we're actually seeing now, the Wall Street Journal put out a piece the other day that said we're almost to the level of getting oil out of the strait. region that we were at right before the war started. And I think you are going to start to see them come down. That's what we're seeing from economists who are reporting in the Western

Journal. That's not what Michiganers are experiencing at the pump. It might take a little while. But the fact is, you know, you see we were in a situation of peace. I'm not so sure about that. I want to ask. This is not good for Martha. She's kind of getting rolled on this gas price point. And it's not just that she's getting beaten. It's that Americans at home watching have an experience that is very different than what this Fox News host is saying. This is a moment where they're going to be like, wait a minute, gas prices are still high. I don't care about some arbitrary, maybe the war is going to be over in a few weeks and it might come down. No, no, no, things are expensive right now.

And Abdul is driving that point home very well. Well, I just want to say there was no war, and then there was a war. And more war has made us less safe. It has increased our prices. It has made it so that we don't know where the prices are going to go tomorrow. And I just want to say that, you know, the average Mishigander is looking at this. I don't spend a lot of time about Michiganer. said that they're upset about gas prices.

And it's not just gas prices, it's also grocery prices. Okay. It's also the 18 service members who lost their lives. It's also the fact that you have service members who got deployed and were stuck out at sea without the resources or the rations that they needed. If you know, as I do, many members, I'm going to jump in now because I can't let you filibuster. So, um... Dude, what?

Filibuster? You're interviewing him and he's making really rational points and now she's getting scrambled. This is wild. First of all, our service members are incredible. and they are heroes and they serve our country. Abdul did a really good job of simplifying it on Fox News. He said, there was no war before. Now there is a war.

The more war we have, the less safe we are. I mean, it's very clear causality that he's laying out for the audience, and this is a type of messaging that we just need. So let's compare this to the way Donald Trump is messaging about the war. This is the clip that went incredibly viral. Like right now, at the time of recording this video,

this one version of it has 4.7 million views. Some people say that Donald Trump is, Trump didn't mean what he said here, I'll let you decide, and then I'll give you my take. And again, remember, with the word, it's just artificial, it's a little bit high, it's a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe. They can take out a city, let him take out Los Angeles, let them take out San Diego. That's, this is a very small price to pay, and it's going to be over with very soon. It's essentially almost over with, and they might keep going a little,

long, you know, they always say they have a big threshold for pain. They need it. Let me tell you, they need it. But it's going to end very... The crowd cheering is insane. I'm just going to play this moment one more time for you so you can hear it. It's artificial. It's a little bit high. It's a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe. They can take out a city. Let them take out Los Angeles. Let them take out San Diego. That's, this is a very small price to pay. And it's going to... That is absolutely deranged coming from the president of the United States. And really quickly, I think one of the largest problems in our media today

is this type of bias that downplays what the president of the United States says. And that's why I really like today's sponsor, Ground News, because they don't tell you what to think. They show you how different outlets are covering the same story so you can build a mental model of how this type of media distortion happens. And you can then arrive at the truth by having very valid vetting. sources using ground news. For example, I was looking at this story of Trump suggesting that Iran could take out L.A. and San Diego. When you scroll down, you see this is being covered slightly more

by left-leading sources. A lot of centrist sources are covering this, and you can even see the types of headlines that are being written about it. Right-wing media companies are writing more favorable headlines. Left-ling media companies are trying to say that this is bad shit crazy as it is. There's also the blind spot feed, which is personally my favorite. It shows you what stories aren't being covered by one side of the aisle. Check this out. New York City just moved 10 more children off of the child care voucher waitlist. They're no longer waitlisted. They now have access to what they need. This is a great story, and Republicans aren't covering it because they hate Zoran. It's being covered 60% by left-leaning sources, only 20% by right-leaning sources.

If you want to understand media bias, go to ground. news slash AM for 40% off the vantage plan. Again, ground. dot news slash AM, the link is below for 40% off the vantage plan. And let's jump back into this video. So after this clip of Donald Trump went incredibly viral, we had some people rightfully saying what the actual fuck. The president of the United States is casually talking about Iran bombing cities in the United States.

We also had some people downplay it, and these are respected people who are just trying to give too much charity and grace. Like Aaron Blake, for example. He said, here are Trump's fuller comments about Los Angeles and San Diego. My read, the small price to pay comment refers back to the costs of the war, like gas prices, not the idea of Iran nuking L.A. and San Diego. Okay, hold up. I get what this guy's trying to say, right? But the fact that we're even having a debate, the fact that we're even having a debate, the fact that we're even having a conversation about whether or not Trump wants Iran to nuke L.A. and San Diego

is fucking bat-shin crazy. Secondly, I do think Donald Trump was being rather laissez-faire about Iran as he has been. So this is the problem. Trump went to war with Iran thinking it would be very, very quick. Since then, we have depleted a lot of our missile capacity and Trump is starting to care less and less about real national security threats. This is a real concern. while our missile capacity is at critical levels, basically, we have China who is giving intelligence to Iran and wants to make a move on Taiwan. Trump doesn't give a shit. He's blinding himself to it. When China came to the United States, Trump didn't meaningfully confront them. He rolled out the red carpet.

Russia is also giving intel to Iran so they can target our troops. The point is, Trump has downplayed and not cared about national security this entire war, and this is just an extension. So let's read the transcript. Let's give it a fair shot. Let's read what he says in the full moment. Quote, she stole a lot of things that didn't work out too well. But I want to see, I want to see a tremendous victory. You want to see a tremendous victory because it verifies all the things we did.

And again, remember, with the war, it's just artificial. It's a little bit high. It's a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe. They can take out a city. Let them take. Let them take out Los Angeles. Let them take out San Diego. This is a very small price to pay, and it's going to be over soon.

It's essentially almost over with, and they might keep going a little long, you know. They always say they have a big threshold for pain. I'm sorry, but this doesn't make it any better. Why was the president of the United States saying, let them take out Los Angeles, let them take out San Diego? I'm not cherry-picking the script. We have his entire transcript in front of us. I think the reality is Trump is so deeply out of touch with reality,

like in a very real sense of the word. He has no walls around him or reality tests to push back on his delusions. He's so delusional and so lackluster about our national security and declining so much so that he's just stringing together a bunch of thoughts and words and sentences incoherently. And he's sort of, no, not sort of. He actually, declaratively, downplayed San Diego and Los Angeles being nuked. Then Daniel Dale from CNN responds to Kamala, H.K., Q, the headquarters, the headquarters said,

Trump on Iran, let them take out Los Angeles in San Diego. It's a small price to pay. Daniel Dale comes in and says, this isn't a direct quote from Trump, and I very much don't think it's a correct paraphrase. Trump has repeatedly argued that the consequences of the war, like higher gas prices, are a small price to pay. So last night, in a rambling and incoherent fashion,

what Trump was actually doing was claiming high prices are temporary, then talked about the damage Iran could do, then in confusing style repeated the point that this is the war and we could let it happen. I'm sorry, I don't fully buy this. I respect what Daniel Dale does, but he even says it himself. It's Trump's fault that you have to be steeped in Trump rally speak to know what he was saying.

And of course, you can say it's inappropriate regardless for the president to casually float the possibility of a city being wiped out, but the context exists and is important. Sure, I'm a big fan of context. You know on the Adamachar feed, we are very, very fair, and we give everything a fair shot. And we're also brutal when Trump says shit that's wrong. I want to be honest, this is insane that people are downplaying the president of the United States

on stage talking about Los Angeles and San Diego being nuked. And if we want to talk about context, I agree. If we zoom out, the context is that Donald Trump has repeatedly downplayed the threats of national security. He was asked one time, hey, Iran still has missiles. and you said they had none left. And Trump said, well, who cares? We have missiles, they have missiles. Like, he is over and over and over

downplaying the national security threat. Then enter J.D. Vance, the least charismatic person ever, admitting that he's basically just somebody who's supposed to be doing media on TV for the Trump admin watch. I'll tell you a little story that a couple of days ago,

I was talking with our great secretary of state, Marco Rubio, and Marco said, you know, and Marco said, he said, He said, there are two kinds of guys in the United States Senate. They're the guys who want to show up and go on TV and just, you know, earn a lot of credibility for themselves. And there are guys who show up to get things done. Now, I said, Marco, first of all, don't, don't criticize the people who show up and get on TV. That made me Vice President of the United States.

Wow. Good one, J.D. Vance. Great joke. Talking about your inexperience leading to you just being kind of a puppeteer. president who goes on television and gets puppeteered around by Peter Thiel and Trump, and then nuking your chances in 2028 by saying you do nothing but go on TV. I then want to show you another clip of Abdul al-Sayyad talking about his view on health care. This is very important to show you all because it got one million views. Just in this one clip, I'm sure it got millions and millions across channels. This is how Democrats should be communicating. I am such a fan of

Democrats going into hostile spaces and just keeping their cool and being very affable, approachable, likable, speaking to the issues that Americans care about. To be honest, a lot of Republicans have this view of all liberals or all left-leaning people as like screeching, purity testing freaks that do this and that. No, a lot of us just genuinely want to see a better country more focused on human dignity. You guys are all normal people. I'm a normal guy. So is Abdul al-Sayyad.

We want a better country. and I think this type of representation is very powerful. Take a look. You know, to some extent. But with regard to health care, you've talked about, I know you've been asked a lot about the money that it will take to do a single-payer government-run health care system, and I know there's a big private component of that as well. But what I'm more concerned about is the declining care

because you look at other places like the UK, like some places in Europe, including Poland, what you end up getting is people waiting so long. long and then they call you and say, oh, well, your surgery is going to be on Tuesday, whether you can be there or not. One of the statistics that really caught my eye in the UK in 23, more than half the people who died in England in that year were on the NHS waiting list and they couldn't get any care. So why would that be a better system for us? Well, number one, I'm not advocating for the same system as the NHS. Number two, we are the richest most powerful

country in the world. The idea that we're going to point to another country who does something poorly and say, we can't possibly do it better is ridiculous because we're the greatest country in the world. But then the second point I'll make here is that, do you know what the average wait time for a cardiologist in America is? Tommy. Two and a half months. Nobody ever tells you you should see a cardiologist in two and a half months.

Two and a half weeks, maybe. Two and a half days better. Two and a half hours, that's the best. But a lot of other countries, they don't wait as long to see a cardiologist. So the idea that somehow, because you point to another country and say, well, they failed on this particular statistic, that we're not also failing as a problem. But here's the difference. We pay 19 cents on the dollar for every dollar spent in our entire economy on health care. For the amount of money that we pay in health care, you would think that we would not have to wait at all.

The average premium is putting people in a lot of harm's way. Then there's the deductible, $4,500 on average to get the health care that you already paid for every single month in the richest, most powerful country in the world. The idea that we can't do better, to me, is kind of insane. Holy shit, he is getting so good at this. Obviously, he's always been great. but I think there's something about a campaign that really sharpens the blade, and this is sharp as off. I think a lot of people think that we can do better. I think the question is about how to get there, and I understand, you know, the program that you're putting forward,

and we'll see if Michigan voters are, you know, want to go down. She doesn't know what to say. Let me show you one more clip. Okay. So you're a capitalist, not a socialist. So does that disturb you to hear this growing movement of Democratic Socialists and the, United States who think that it's the government's... Ah, she's trying to pit Democrats against each other.

Very Fox News question. Martha McCallum isn't one of the worst or most offensive Fox News. So she can oftentimes hold a conversation. Compare that to the smugness dripping off of Jesse Waters at all times. But even she is, she has an angle. A dignified life because I always thought it was on us to succeed, not on someone else to do that for us. Well, Martha, I assume you went to good public schools.

Yes, I did. And you got to drive on good roads today, or you rode the subway there? Pretty much. Right? Or you wish those roads were good? Yeah. And when you put your garbage out, somebody comes and picks it up? Yes.

Yeah, and you breathe clean air. You pay an enormous amount of taxes in New York and New Jersey for those things. And I guess what I'm saying is, what I'm a capitalist because I believe that we leave it to supply and demand, right, to allocate where capital ought to go and the goods that we produce. but I also believe that there's a basic amount of soil that we need. Good school, clean air, clean water, health care, child care. Those are things that just are in the firmament. Now, those are the basic foundations. It's not disturbing to me to think that government should be able to offer you those basic things,

just like you got and I got. I'm so grateful for the amazing public schools that I got to have. But we pay so much money for those services. Well, the reason we pay so much money is because we end up fighting wars that we shouldn't be fighting. That's why we end up paying so much money. Oh, my. It's so good. And because we cut loopholes for the richest people who pay a lower effective tax rate than we do. He's so good at this. So, so, so good.

So I would rather us not buy a whole bunch of wars, and I would rather us buy really good schools. All right. Well, this is a very good articulation of it. I'm also a capitalist. I'm somebody who is a liberal. I think that communism as a historical concept has never quite worked. But capitalism isn't functioning as it should right now. There should be a more equitable, human dignity-based way to have a system that doesn't, result in massive wealth inequality. So yes, on one hand, we can say supply and demand is good to allocate resources. On the other hand, as Abdul says, people need basic necessities when we are the richest country in the world. I'm going to leave it there. If you appreciate these videos and you

want more, drop a like, subscribe, more Abdul al-Sayyads, less Donald Trump's talking about bombing Los Angeles and San Diego. Love you all. Peace out.