The DeVory Darkins Show - Trump announces MAJOR UPDATE warns Iran to EVACUATE immediately

Episode Date: June 19, 2025

President Trump during his visit to the G7 Summit in Canada announced TWO MAJOR UPDATES. First the trade agreement between USA and UK is now officially signed. And Secondly that the citizens of Tehran, Iran need to EVACAUTE Immediately. This comes as tensions between Israel and Iran have escalated.FOLLOW ME:https://www.twitter.com/devorydarkinshttps://www.instagram.com/devorydarkinshttps://www.rumble.com/c/devorydarkinshttps://devory.wtf.tvBUY ME A COFFEE:https://buymeacoffee.com/devorydarkinsSHOP OUR MERCH STORE:https://store.devorydarkins.comBUSINESS INQUIRIES:[e-mail]

Okay, so in this video, we have two big updates from the president. One, has to do with the UK and America in regards to trade. And two, a warning to evacuate Tehran immediately, which indicates that it's about to go down in the Middle East. Now, of course, I'm going to show you what everybody is saying about all this and then give you the bottom line. Have you spoken to Prime Minister Netanyahu? I've spoken to everybody. Israel is doing very well, as you probably noticed, and I gave Iran 60 days, and they said, no, and the 61st year saw what happened, day 61, so I'm in constant touch, and as I've been saying, I think a deal will be signed or something will happen, but a deal will be signed, and I think Iran is foolish not to sign one. Iran is clearly not in Netanyahu of attacking them to deliberately derail your nuclear plan.

What do you say to that? Do you think that's... No, no. Look, Iran should have signed the deal. If it would help bring Iran to the negotiating table, would you guarantee that the U.S. would not get involved militarily? Well, I think this. I think Iran basically is at the negotiating table. They want to make a deal.

And as soon as I leave here, we're going to be doing something. But I have to leave here. I have, you know, this commitment. and have a lot of commitments, have a commitment to a lot of countries, including the UK where we just signed our deal. Okay, so that was President Trump standing next to UK Prime Minister Stalmer, where they announced that the trade agreement between the UK and USA is official, signed on the dotted line. But during that announcement, they took questions, and one of them clearly was about Israel and Iran. And the president continues to tell everybody where he stands, and that is Iran is not allowed to have a nuclear weapon. Now, of course, he put this on true social that really got people's attention.

He says this, Iran should have signed the deal. I told them to sign. What a shame and waste of human life. Simply stated, Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. I said it over and over again. Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran. The question that came up today a lot on social media amongst people on the right, is this really a regime change or not?

And I think it's obvious it is, ladies and gentlemen, because the president did even deny it. Take a listen. President, do you want to see regime change in Iran? I want to see no nuclear weapon in Iran, and we're well in our way to making sure that happens. We've had a discussion about that this morning. There's a U.S. 7 absolute clarity in relation to the nuclear program. We do not want to see it.

Yeah, so the president has been consistent on that exact statement, which is he does not want to see Iran with a nuclear weapon. We understand that. But the problem is, and this is where I would. say where the rubber meets the road is most people on the right who voted for Trump, they don't want to hear about regime changes either. And what's unfortunate is maybe you can't have one without the other. Maybe in order to make sure that Iran does not have a nuclear weapon, a regime change may have to happen. The problem is history has proven that regime

changes don't work. In fact, in some cases, they make it worse. See Iraq. Now, he also responded to a reporter who asked him about Tucker Carlson's criticism. Take a list. So I don't know what Tucker Carlson is saying that you're complicit in the war. I don't know what Tucker Carlson is saying. Let him go get a television network and say it so that people listen. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Yeah, a lot of them. Japan? A lot of them. It could happen. How did it happen? Japanese, sir. Well, okay, so that was the reaction from President Trump in regards to Tucker Carlson. And basically, Tucker's being accused of slamming the president and Fox News for

encouraging World War III. I mean, that's as simple as I can make it. And there's a lot of people who see it that way. And then there's a lot of people who don't see it that way. But one thing's for sure. Your boy, Lindsay Graham, rushed to Fox News to promote the idea of a regime change. And if Iran doesn't get with the program

to go all in and blow them off the face of the earth, take a listen. Well, I take president at his word. He gave Iran 60 days to do a deal on the 61st day. we are where we are. There's two ways to stop Iran from having a nuclear weapon. One is diplomacy, the other is force. I think the headline tonight is we're moving into the land of force. I think Iran has allowed themselves to be fooled in the thinking they could manipulate Trump. Same old tactics with the wrong guy when it comes to Trump. To all those who voted for President

Trump and got him in office, God bless you. He's the right guy. at the right time. These are dangerous times. Why do we say no nuclear weapon for Iran? They're a religious theocracy. They're built around the extreme version of Islam. They want to destroy Saudi Arabia and the Sunni branch of Islam. They want to kill all the Jews in Israel and come after us. That's what their whole country is built upon, a theocratic view that there's nobody else in the world but them when it comes to worshiping God. If they had a nuclear weapon, they would use it. Israel believes that. I believe that. Okay. Well, for the senator, he should remind himself, there's no guarantee that Iran will

be better off because history has shown us, once again, as I said earlier, that regime changes are not always successful, and in some cases, they make it worse. Now, here is Charlie Kirk on Fox News as well, and he represents the side that says, hey, guys, let's pump the brakes here. Before we pass judgment on President Trump, let's give him the ability to prove that he has. is right. Let's hear what he said. Take a listen. Well, first, this is the moment that President Trump was elected for. Thank God that we have President Trump in the Oval Office with this high-stakes situation. But President Trump, 10 years ago, he went down the golden escalator. And when he announced for the presidency, 10 years ago to this day, he remade the Republican Party

on foreign policy. He said no more permanent wars in the Middle East. He criticized the Bush Cheney philosophy of endless quagmires. Albeit, though, he is not an isolationist. He is willing to use violent and precise force against our enemies, like taking out Soleimani or dropping the Moab, if and when necessary. President Trump understands his base extraordinarily well. He knows that his base does not want another Iraq. He does not want Libya, does not want a civil war or bedlam where the United States is left carrying the bag.

But also President Trump has been morally clear for a decade. Iran should not have a nuclear weapon. And President Trump has the talent and the expertise to be able to thread that needle. The generation that I represent, Jesse, the under 30 crowd, they absolutely are very war-weary. Many of them voted for President Trump on college campuses because they did not want to see a Joe Biden or George Bush philosophy where we get into this endless conflict where we're sending hundreds of billions of dollars. I think President Trump will able to balance those two things while defending our allies, saying that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon without having to deploy a single American troop

or even having America involved from the sky, President Trump can get that deal done while fulfilling the mandate that the voters gave him. Now, I would say that's the measured response to everything that's been happening because basically you have sides in MAGA that, you know, they're emotional. They're reacting and already passing judgment on the president,

but he hasn't even issued any orders yet. But there's no question that there are indicators that leads a lot of people to believe that this war is going to escalate. that this conflict is going to escalate into a war, and it's risky more than ever that America will be dragged into it where soldiers will have to be deployed. That is a legitimate concern, but it just hasn't happened yet. And so I agree with Charlie Kirk that, why don't we get the president of the United States that most people voted for here some time to prove that his

way of doing things will work. I think that's a perfectly sound argument to make. Now, here is Bill O'Reilly because he actually texted with the president this. morning and here's what the president told him take a listen um earlier today very briefly i texted with president trump he doesn't want to use uh american air power at this point um because that would cause some problems with china and putin uh he would rather have the iranian surrender which he believes they will now that's what he believes that the mullahs are through they will have to sign a deal the deal will be that

the weapons inspectors go in to all of the places that are working on the nuke they identify what they have and then the Iranians themselves under supervision of the United Nations would destroy a lot of their arsenal

that's what the deal would entail Mollos don't want to do that obviously but President Trump believes that will happen and the Why does he believe he can trust the Iranians? It's not a matter of trust.

This is going to happen real fast so that the weapons inspectors would be in there. They would identify what's happening, and then the moas would be ordered to destroy it on the spot. If they didn't, then the B-17s would go up. Now, of course, when you have a podcast and you sit behind a keyboard or your cell phone, you can issue all the opinions you want

about what President Trump should do or what he's doing wrong, and everybody's entitled to do that. But once you're actually in the hot seat and you are the president of the United States, you have what we would call the burden of leadership. And you've got to make decisions that even people who support you disagree with. And I want to acknowledge that because that is the reality of leadership, ladies and gentlemen. And so, again, let's pump the brakes and see what happens. And if we go to war and people are dragged into it, particularly men and women and our sons and daughters from America, then I would expect people to be very critical of President Trump. But I'm seeing people right now on social media talking about he should be impeached.

I'm done with him. I can't believe he's doing this. What has he done exactly? Except, I guess, caused a little panic in Tehran with head warning, which Bill O'Reilly spoke about. Take a listen to that. The signal that the mullahs got, that they're panicking about, is the flight out of Tehran. And that's why the president mentioned it. Get out of town.

So there are about 10 million people in town. Their lives are disrupted. They are afraid. They don't like the mullahs anyway, most of them, particularly the younger Persians. They don't like the mullahs. The mullahs now are sensing their army may turn on them. And it's entirely possible that would happen. So what President Trump's strategy is is to play this out a little longer

because Israel is getting stronger while Iran is getting weaker. You just said they're running out of ordinance. They can't replace it. While it's having food shortages, tough to get food in there now. And Iran does not grow enough food to feed its population. A lot on the table. And the signals are coming from the mullahs now. We're serious. Now we'll make a deal according to the president.

Yeah. So the one thing that stood out to me that Bill O'Reilly said is that the president is playing this out, right? He wants to see this unfold and not rush in order to make a decision because that's what Israel may want. And as I stated in my earlier video, there are so many opinions about what the president should do. And you've got a lot of people with bigger audiences, more household names, right? who are already passing judgment on the president. And that's the thing I would probably disagree most about everything so far. I do not support America going to war against Iran. There's no question. But we're not yet.

There's no official declaration that we are at war with that country. So I'm not going to pass judgment on the president unless that happens. However, the Secretary of Defense Pete Hexeth went on to Fox News, and he is confirming that there are certain decisions that are being made that would lead to a declaration of war, if you know what I mean. Listen to what he just said. So you're going to be in the situation room pretty soon with the president. Is he still aiming for a nuclear deal with the Iranians? Of course. The president's, as he said today, his position has not changed.

What you're watching in real time is peace through strength and America first. Our job is to be strong. We are postured defensively in the region to be strong in pursuit of a peace deal. And we certainly hope that's what happens here. And America First means we're going to defend American personnel and American interests. So when you see jets and you see air defense assets and counter UAS assets, that's because my job as the Secretary of Defense is to ensure that our people are safe and that we're strong so that we can set the conditions for a deal. And President Trump's made it clear it's on the table. The question is whether Iran will take it.

So in other words, we are already sending our forces over there, aircraft carrier, destroyers. It seems to me he was saying fighter jets and I'm sure drones as well. And I already stated earlier that there were already U.S. armed forces in that area to begin with. They've always been in that area for the past few decades. So I'm not still surprised by that statement. But again, that is an indicator. That is a decision that could lead to us getting dragged into this war. And I'm not saying that's going to happen.

And he said the reason they're making this decision is to make it very clear to Iran that your best option here is just to sign a deal. But that doesn't mean they won't because they don't think like the United States of America. It's not a democracy over there. Okay. They've been fighting for generations on end. And they can still sign this agreement. then the next day, go against it. And what's interesting is this next clip from Mark Kelly, Democrat, of course, from Arizona,

who I don't agree with on anything personally. However, he makes the same point I just did. And that's why it's so interesting that you're seeing on both sides of the aisle where no one really wants to get involved with this, unless you're some warhawk, of course. But it's also a complicated issue. Take a listen. Would you support if the U.S. decided to strike Iran? directly, even if U.S. forces have not been attacked in order to try to actually eliminate the planted

Fordo and Natanz? I mean, you know, I would like to see Iran's nuclear capability to be completely disarmed. It is a tough problem. You would have to hit those facilities, the underground facilities with GBU 57s, you know, the massive ordinance penetrator. It's a 5,000 pound weapon. The Israelis, not only do they not have the weapon, they don't have the ability to deliver it, even if they did have it, you know, at this point. So, Anderson, this is a complicated problem. I think it's going to be hard. Even once you try to strike something that's underground, they can rebuild it. You know, my view on this is ultimately if you wanted to completely eliminate the ability for them to get to someday down the line, get to a nuclear weapon, you'd have to remove the uranium 235.

the uranium hexafluoride gas, which is what you first put into the centrifuges, you'd have to destroy all the centrifuges. That would take a capability that, in my view, the Israelis currently do not have. I don't want to see this escalate. I think maybe there's a scenario here in the next couple days, or maybe in a week or so, that the Iranians would agree to come to some sort of negotiated settlement. to get us back to a point where they are not going to continue to develop a nuclear weapon, and we can do it in a way that's verifiable. Yeah.

So if you're able to discern and look beyond the noise, then you would kind of understand exactly what the goal here is for the United States of America. They want Iran to come to the table. They want Iran to sign an agreement. But this is an agreement where not only is it about trust, but it's about verifying that they're adhering to the agreement. And I think that is what has been missing in prior agreements or diplomacy that took place before President Trump.

And maybe that's why, once again, it proves that people should give the president some patience here because they're approaching this in a different way this time. It's not just about signing something on a piece of paper. It's about making sure that you're following through on what you sign on that piece of paper. And if you don't, here are the consequences. We know United States of America, especially under the Biden administration, lacked enforcement. There was zero accountability because they didn't even hold themselves accountable.

So if that's the way that the Trump administration is going to go, I think that is the appropriate response. But again, that does not mean Iran sees it that way, and it definitely does not mean they will sign the agreement. And again, even if they sign it, it does not mean they will adhere to the agreement because it's just that complicated. not only to take out what they claim to be part of Iran's nuclear program, which warrants United States military to be involved in because they claim Israel can't do it. But I have to ask the question of Israel can execute precision targets towards Iranian leaders. Why can't they take out the underground bunkers?

I don't know. I'm just asking questions, of course. But that's where we see it. And that is the most up-to-date information in regards to this conflict. So I want to hear from you in the comments section. What is your thoughts about all this? I showed you what multiple people are saying on both sides of this conversation. Clearly, I would assume you don't want to see America in this war. But I also want to hear and confirm, do you see how complicated this can be as well? Let me know your thoughts about all this in the comments section below. Okay, so in our next video, the Minnesota shooter has been caught by law enforcement. And of course, Democrats respond in what way? They make a fatal mistake by blaming Trump for the tragedy. So if you miss out on that video, more stories from earlier today. All you have to do is click on that video because it's coming up right now.