The Duran Podcast - Trump shake-up; Deep State, Ukraine and Five Eyes

Episode Date: November 15, 2024

Trump shake-up; Deep State, Ukraine and Five Eyes

All right, Alexander, let's talk about the Trump cabinet picks. What are your thoughts? That's the most obvious question to ask you. What are your thoughts? I mean, mixed reactions. Some people like them. Some people don't. Some people are in the middle.

I mean, there's all kinds of mixed reactions. Very quickly, he's made his picks very quickly, which signals to me that he had an understanding of what he wanted. Anyway, what are your thoughts? Or maybe we should start with a certain pick as we. Well, I don't know. Go ahead. Well, I'm going to be absolutely, I'm going to actually deal with the whole thing because I think we can now see the strategy.

So he goes for a very conventional figure for Secretary of State, as being conventional in American political class terms, who is Marco Rubio, to hear the Secretary of State, which is the senior position. And then he surrounds this person with all sorts of very unusual, unorthodox people who are loyal to him and who he trusts. So he has Matt Gatz, if he can, as Attorney General. He's got, I never get his name right. The new Defence Secretary who's from Fox News, you probably get the name better. Pete Hexeth. Hewreck, exactly. Pete Hexeth, yeah. He's got Tulsi Gabbard, as Defense, sorry, Director of National Intelligence. He's packing the government with people who are

basically strongly loyal to himself and people who definitely, I would say, in some form or other, either align with the MAGA movement, which is what most of these people do, or alternatively, in the case of Tulsi Gabbard, are genuine independence who are also aligned with his foreign policy. So actually, if you ignore Marco Rubio, and I'm going to suggest that people should, because, as I said, I think this is, despite the fact that he's Secretary of State, he looks, he looks, if anything, the old man out in this crowd. If you ignore Marco Rubio, this is a very, very radical, you know, shakeup of the American government. He's going to run into significant problems in the Senate. Already the rhinos there are gathering, it's going to be very difficult to get

some of these people confirmed. People like Matt Gatz already looks extremely tough. Tulsie Gabbard, there's already a briefing war against her. But anyway, this is what he's trying to do. And as I said, it's interesting. It's certainly very, very different. I'm not going to speak as to the ability of some of these people, because I don't know very much about them. But certainly this is an attempt to create a very, very different. Trump administration to the one that we saw in 2017, when, if you remember, he had briefly Michael Flynn as his national security advisor, all of his other people were basically pitt for him by, was it, Rance Prebus and the Republican establishment, and he ended up

McConnell and all of those people. And he ended up with an administration that was completely unlike the one that he wanted. So this is what he's trying to do. Yeah, he's trying to... Where would you put Walts, though? Mike Walts, because, okay, I can understand Tulsi, Matt Gitts, all of these people that he's picked, Hegseth, all these people that are, I just said, are unconventional, surprise picks, let's say, that aren't part of the establishment structure.

But you also have Mike Walts, who's from Florida, from I understand, close to Trump. He has a big position, Jake Sullivan's job as NSA. I believe that's what Bolton was. He was NSA, right? That's right, absolutely. So you have Mike Waltz, who has, who's very hawkish, very hawkish towards Iran, very hawkish towards China, was very hawkish towards Russia, has said some things about Russia, which, as you have explained in your videos, shows that he may not have such a good understanding of what's going on. in Russia or the conflict in Ukraine. But he has also moderated his tone as well with regards to Project Ukraine, basically saying, as has Rubio, basically saying we need to get out of this.

So you have these people around Rubio as Secretary of State, but you also have NSA, Mike Watts. I think Walses is more tilted towards the Maga Trump side than towards the conventional establishment. He's from the House of Representatives. He's part of the Republican majority there. He has been consistently loyal to Donald Trump's rule of Donald Trump's problems, as so I understand. He is a military officer who served in the Middle East. That's his background. He's got many of the ideas and feelings that military officers who served in the Middle East also have. I think primarily and first and foremost, the reason Trump has picked him is because he sees he was loyal. Now, he's got certain ideas or views, which I don't think, well, say certainly not mine.

I think, as I said on Russia, things that he said about Russia are clearly wrong. I mean, he still talks about Russia being the gas station, you know, masquerading as a country and all that nonsense. But I don't think that he's going to be focused so much on those. things. And I think something straightforward. I think that Donald Trump's real national security advisor is Donald Trump. I think he has very clear ideas what he wants to do with foreign policy. Walter's job will be to run the National Security Council bureaucracy on Donald Trump's behalf, and he is loyal to Donald Trump. That is what I think. I believe that we're going to have a

have a very strong executive. Yeah. I mean, the decisions that Trump is going to make are going to be executed this time around by the people he has in place. Even Rubio, even Rubio is going to do, as Trump says. And I think Rubio may not be such a, I was thinking about this. I mean, if you have to pick a more traditional neocon, like from the school of Graham or Newland or Kagan, but not at that level, not at that level, not a,

a true believer like Nuland or Keg. I mean, those guys are true believers in the neocon cause. Rubio, yes, he's a neocon, but I don't think he's a true believer. I think he gravitates more towards where the power is. If the power is with the neocons, he gravitates more towards that. If the power is with America first, he'll gravitate more towards that. But if you have to pick someone to put in your administration who can also provide you some of the eyes and ears of what the Grams and the McConnell's and all of these people are

thinking or what they're saying, it might not be a bad idea to bring in Rubio into some position. I don't know if you put him in a secretary of state. But if you're going to keep a neocon close to you, I think Rubio is probably the right choice as far as someone who would not backstab you as badly as a McConnell. or Lindsay Graham, these types of Cheney's, these types of people. I mean, I don't know. What are your thoughts about that? I mean, that may be what he's doing in a way.

Exactly. I mean, the point about Rubio is that he clearly wants very much to be Secretary of State. Now, why he does, I'm not really sure, but anyway, he does. He clearly wants to be in on the team. He's gone out of his way over the last couple of years to make clear his loyalty to Donald Trump. He's modified his positions on Russia and Ukraine very, very much. very, very radically. He voted against the aid package to Ukraine last April, which is, I think, you know, quite a big step. Not one should underestimate. So he's much more malleable than,

I mean, someone like Lindsey Graham, for example, would be. And obviously, as you rightly say, he's not part of the, he's not part of the Victoria Newland Robert Kagan School of Neocons. I mean, he's not on that, he's not fully in that case. What I think he does is he provides Trump or the intention, the plan is that he's going to provide Trump with a certain degree of cover. So, Rubio will be wheeled out to defend the policies, the policy specifically on Ukraine, which I'm now quite clear in my mind. Trump absolutely does want to close down, by the way. I think that there is no doubt about this. I agree.

His indications to the Europeans are consistent with that. His refusal even to talk about Ukraine with Biden was really remarkable. They had the meeting in the Oval Office and he refused to talk with Biden about Ukraine. Five minutes they talked about. Five minutes, exactly. Five minutes. Towards the end. Exactly.

That's so amazing. It is amazing. So I think he's clearly made up his mind that he's going to close down Ukraine. That's going to prove very controversial with some people for whom this is still their project. So he needs someone like Rubio to go out there and defend it and explain it. And in the meantime, he's bringing all of these people, Randcliffe, Gambard, Gats, it didn't get him. I'm sorry, again, the new defense secretary. Exactly, exactly, exactly.

He's bringing all of these people. who are loyalty himself and who he wants to undertake. First and foremost, I mean, his major objective, it seems to me, is to clear out the bureaucracy in Washington of those people who made his life impossible if he's first done. He wants to do that with the Department of Justice, with the FBI. That's Gats. Generals. He wants to do that with the generals, which is what Hepta is.

He wants to do that with the intelligence community, which is what Gabbard and Radcliffe are about. And that's, I think, he's priority number one. Not the Middle East, not China, even though these people have those views, because they are the views that many people conventionally within the larger MAGA movement hold. But it is about power in Washington. That's what it looks like to make. and prioritise in terms of foreign policy, ending Project Ukraine. It is an absolute disaster.

We recently did that live stream with Jim Webb. He said how Ukraine poisons everything. He's absolutely right. I thought that was a brilliant comment that Jim Webb made, by the way. And I think that Trump understands that. And he's moving purposefully to close the whole thing down. Yeah, I would even go so far as to guess, just a guess that he's appointing, Fox News is saying he's going to appoint a special envoy for Ukraine. Maybe Richard Grinnell. That may be a special envoy. I don't know, just a guess. All of this is a guess. But I would say that don't be surprised if Trump floats out some proposals for a ceasefire to Russia and to Ukraine. Don't be surprised that if Ukraine shoots. down these proposals, Trump says, fine, no problem, you deal with it. I wouldn't be surprised

if we see something like that unfold. I wouldn't be surprised at all. In fact, I wouldn't even be surprised if Trump pitched the proposals at exactly the level, which he knows that Ukrainians will reject. Because, of course, they're rejecting everything at the present time. And I suspect whoever wins out in Kiev in the end where there's a power struggle underway now, unsurprisingly. Election in May. Is that true? Well, there's talk of that. We'll come. We can discuss that maybe in another program. But anyway, the point is, the point is whoever comes to the top in Kiev are going to find it all but impossible to accept whatever proposals Trump is going to put to them. And that will give him the perfect excuse to walk away.

And I think that is what he wants to do. I think he also wants to reopen discussions with the Russians. And I think he understands the importance of that. And again, I think some of the people he's putting in, despite their unconventional backgrounds and their previous views, are people who are less fixated with Russia and who would probably be willing to go along with him on that as well. No, I mean, you know, a lot of the people that he's put in, not all of them, but a lot of the people that he's put in have said the usual stuff about Russia. Thug, dictatorship, Russia needs to be defeated. Ukraine needs to defeat Russia. We need to defeat Putin. They've said this stuff. But I mean, you shouldn't expect anything else coming out of Washington for the most part. You're not going to find, it's going to be very difficult to find someone in D.C. who is going to say we need to be friends with Russia.

Yeah. Trump is the one person that has said we need to get along with Russia to a series. He's probably the only one that has said that. Why is it wrong to get along with Russia? He said, we should be able to get along with Russia. And when he said that in 2016 or 2015, whenever he said that, we saw what happened. Exactly. I mean, we saw what happened when he said that. The entire establishment went after him. They really decided they're going to destroy this guy. when he was the one person who said, is it a bad thing if I get along with Russia? They flipped out.

So where am I getting to? They flipped out. Trump at the time when he won in 2016, he had basically one person to help him navigate the establishment, the government. And that was Michael Flynn. Biden, Obama, all these people,

they got in a room together in the White House and they said, okay, This is the guy we have to knock out before Trump even gets into the White House. Let's knock them out. And then we've got Trump all alone and we can start putting in place the Bolton's and the Pompeos and all of these guys, McMasters, whatever. That's what they did. Exactly.

And they did it very effectively. Exactly. Very effectively. Yeah. They got rid of the one person who was going to guide Trump through the D.C. maze. This time around, he's got a lot of, Flynn's. Your thoughts. I mean, like a lot. Who do you take out? That is exactly right. And the point to make it.

If you're Biden, Obama, Pelosi, who do you, who do you target first to take out, to remove? Well, I think the first people that he has to deal with and are the most important. I mean, obviously there's the people in Congress in the Senate. The rhinos are still there. They've reorganized. They've got Thune as the Senate majority leader. They're already talking about blocking some of Trump's appointments. Gabbards and Gats are particularly spoken about. So he's still got problems with them, and that's going to be difficult for him because the Senate is important. But having said that, he's got, you know, the electoral mandate. He can do things with the rhinos that he wasn't able to do before. He's got solid support, I think, with the Republican Party in the House of Representatives.

Johnson, who is the Speaker, is clearly now aligned with him. He's got much more support within the senatorial, the Senate caucus, the Republican caucus in the Senate, than he used to. So he's got a problem there. But his biggest and most dangerous enemies by far were within the bureaucracy, the deep state, if you like. That's where the real problems were. That was where the briefing wall began. The Vidmins and the Strucks and these guys. Exactly.

You don't know their name, but. Exactly. All of those. And, you know, the comies and all of those. And there are people like that still. The people who signed off on, you know, the letter about the laptop. You remember a certain laptop and the letter. All of those people.

So he's got, those are the single most powerful. most dangerous group that he has to clear out. And I think if you look at his cabinet picks and also the role that Elon Musk and Vivek Ramoswami are being asked to play, that's what that's what this is all about ultimately. It's trying to bring Washington under control to bring the national security state, which exists in Washington to bring it under control. Now, it's going to be a massively difficult job because it's going to fight him every inch of the way. But that explains these appointments. Already this talk, I mean, Ramoswam is talking about abolishing the FBI, for example.

And Gats might be up to doing that. But these people are going to fight. Every one of them, however, in theory, serves at the wish of the president. He's in a position to sack anybody he wishes. We were talking about that. I remember back in 2017, 2018, that he has the right to sack anyone. He was unable to do that psychologically, I think. He didn't understand that he had that power. I think now he does.

He's got to start sacking people. immediately, I mean, Christopher Ray, who he appointed, by the way, at the FBI and who has been, he's consistent enemy. He needs to get out, he needs to get out of the Justice Department. He needs indeed to do an awful halt with the Justice Department and with the FBI in particular. So that's going to be a major undertaking. But that is his priority. The rhinos by themselves, He can deal with the people of the national security state, the deep state, the bureaucracy. They are the biggest danger. And of course, ultimately, he's also got to do something else, which is, and this is again where Elon Musk and Vek Ramaswamy, I think, have a role to play.

He's also got to cut the funding, which comes ultimately from the military industrial complex. It's channeled through the various lobby groups, the NGOs, the think tanks, all of these things in Washington. He's got to try and find some way of choking that all off in order to get into a situation where we have proper debate in Washington, again, about policy instead of this extraordinary situation that we have today where we have the think tanks which act as an echo change. for the neocons, who have this alliance with the military-industrial complex, who have this alliance with the various agencies, who have all their friends in the Pentagon. He's got, he'd got Ed do an awful lot, you know, close down the revolving door. Drain the swamp. Now, can he do it? He's got two years, in my opinion, to make a difference. He won't be able to drain it completely because it's huge. But if he focuses on that and if things hold together in the economy, he can make a big start.

And if he can position his vice president, J.D. Vans to succeed him and to continue this program beyond that, then we might actually start to start to start to. see something, something happened. America first, that's what these appointments point to, at least to me. Yeah, some wildcards in all of this to Trump's advantage. The one thing that I see is that the mainstream media has completely collapsed after the elections, CNN and MSNBC. They're in a complete mess. There's even talk about Musk and other, let's say, conservative leading groups actually buying out these networks. I don't know how true this is, but they're in a complete mess after the elections. Twitter X has emerged on top. Yes. And that's going to help Trump. It's a very different position than 2016 when the entire media, including what was then Twitter, was absolutely going

after him. So he's got that to his advantage. Of course, he has the other social media that we're going to see how he deals with that, that he didn't deal with that in 2016, and he paid a price for it in his reelection bid in 2020. So we'll see how he deals with that. But he has Musk, who understands the, and Vivek. He has a lot of VCs, actually, who are from Silicon Valley, who understand the space very well. And I'm sure they'll help him to figure out what he does with the big tech media. But the mainstream media is absolutely in a mess. So I think that's kind of a wild card. The other thing that he has to, I agree with you, he has to deal with the think tanks, the NGOs, the NEDs, the Atlantic councils, all of these institutions, they're a big

problem, and he's going to have to see if he can. I don't even know if it's possible. How do you deal with all of these think tanks and institutions? And the other wild card that he's going to have to deal with is the foreign meddling. Yeah. And I'm looking at the UK. Yeah. I'm talking about the helpers, the Mifsudes, the Christopher Steele's. How do you deal with the interference that came from the UK, say, in 2016? You're going to have to have to figure out a way to deal with that.

Well, Mel Kay in the live stream we did with her said that it should be illegal for foreign governments to lobby in Washington. When I said just foreign governments, I think she meant, you know, the whole apparatus that is connected with those governments. And I think that is really ultimately what needs to happen because this whole culture of lobbying that has developed in Washington on a simply massive scale, I mean, we saw with Bob Menendez. I mean, it involves people straightforwardly taking bribes, I mean, which is what the allegation against Menendez is. I'm a reason to think that, you know, this isn't happening and it isn't happening on the big scheme. For Turkey in that case.

Turkey, absolutely. Egypt, I seem to remember. Absolutely. So, I mean, there's an awful lot of that going on. So all of that has to be brought to an end up. That means doing various things. It means perhaps initially administering FARA properly and impartially. FARA has been weaponized over the last couple of years.

So it means using FARA in a completely different way. But I think beyond that, it means thinking about proper legislation. I mean, I have to say that. It would have to be legislation, which is a Supreme Court proof. In other words, the Supreme Court, it would be unwilling to set aside on constitutional grounds. that is even a problem. I don't know that it is about it. So I think that's really, yeah, that really has to happen. And I mean, I think there also have to be warnings given to so-called friendly countries that lobbying in Washington is just not acceptable anymore.

I mean, I understand the lobbying part. I guess my question was, okay, you brought up the lobbying part. And that you're going to have to deal with the lobbying from, from like you said, for Menendez, you have Turkey, Egypt, Israel. Europe, the UK, I mean, even Ukraine, even Ukraine lobbies the United States and the money that goes to Ukraine a lot of it comes back in the form of lobbying. That wasn't my main question. I guess what I was getting at is the steel situation, the helpers, the mis-sudes, these characters that derailed Trump. That gave us Russia gay pretty much. The guy from Australia, what was his name? Alexander Downing, all of these situations.

How do you deal with that? Well, that was part of the intelligence world, I think. I think all of these people were connected to each other through the intelligence, the various intelligence systems, the five eyes and things of that kind. I mean, again, I mean, we're not talking about, you know, the ideal outcomes, which, you know, very difficult to achieve, but proper oversight of the intelligence agencies, bringing the intelligence agencies in the United States properly under control and warnings, not just warnings, but actual rules that if intelligence agencies in other countries interfere in American politics

in the way that happened, which it clearly did, even if they've been encouraged to do that, our intelligence agencies in the United States, then intelligence cooperation by the United States, with the countries that do that ends. I mean, it is a very simple and clear rule which is laid out, because remember, all of these countries, Britain, the other five eyes, Australia, New Zealand and all of the others, ultimately, I mean, when it comes to intelligence collection, they rely overwhelmingly on the United States. The British do provide some supplement in the sense that GCHQ does surveillance for the US, but on the US behalf, you know, electronic, you know, signal intelligence and all of that kind of thing.

But should be frank, you know, I'm going to be careful what I say here. But I have got the sense that a lot of what GCHQ has been doing, is surveilling Americans. Well, the U.S. intelligence agency itself is prohibited from doing GCHQ does on its behalf. So all of that has to be broken up. And it's got to be made absolutely clear that if foreign intelligence agencies want to cooperate with the United States, they need to comply fully with American laws. They're not allowed to do those kind of things for any part of the intelligence system.

And this is a big, big problem, and it's a big challenge because, of course, intelligence agencies, by definition, work together in secret. And it's going to be very difficult to clear that out. Now, I'm going to say something else. I don't know whether Trump really wants to go down this road. But another thing he could do is appoint someone, not Durham, but someone to actually do a genuine, proper, real investigation into what happened between 2016 and, you know, the final sputtering end of Russia gate in the last two years of his presidency. to try and get to the on top of who all of these people were and what the real interconnections were and what kind of things actually did happen.

Give us the answers, for example, to the true identity of Professor Mifson. You know, I've discussed. I know I always ring him up, but things of that sort. Once we get on top of that, once we do it in a way that makes it all public as well. a proper, thorough investigation, the connections between the Democratic Party, the Clinton campaign, the Ukrainians who clearly did play a role, the British clearly did play a role, others who are probably playing a role as well, and an understanding of exactly how that happened. And that should all be laid out to the American people.

And I think if that were to happen, a proper committee, a bit like the church committee that happened in the 1970s of the United States to explore that further, listening also to the things that Edward Snowden was being saying. I mean, it's a huge, it's a huge business. It would require an enormous amount of work. But you know, it can be done. It just does require a lot of political will and a huge amount of consistency. And it requires the right people in the important positions. The Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, the Director of the FBI, and the Director of the CIA. We've seen who he's appointed to the CIA or wants to appoint to the CIA and to Director of National Intelligence and Attorney General. The FBI, of course, we still have to wait and see because that can't happen until he's been inaugurated.

Yeah, the Papa Dolos meeting in London. Carter Page, everything that happened there. Yes. There's so much to the Mueller report. There's so much that we still just don't know what exactly. How did all of this happen? How was Mueller appointed? Why, after he was appointed, was the entire investigation team that was set up around him?

Basically, how did it consist almost exclusively of Democratic Party operatives or people aligned with the Democratic. Party party. Lots of questions. We had very, very few real answers. We've scratched the surface of it, but a real, a real investigation into what actually happened, not a Durham report, which didn't add anything and didn't say anything and didn't take us anywhere very far. Now, again, there'll be enormous resistance to that in Washington, but I agree with what you said before, the media, mainstream media has been shattered. They've been discredited, they've been exposed as the emperor who has no clothes. They realize, I think it's now really hit home to them, that they are a declining force within the American media space. In fact, the Western media space.

We now see a break in the monopoly that they used to exist within social media. here as well. So things are changing and the ground is opening up. It's becoming much more possible to actually rethink and start moving forward with all of these things. And again, the money, I mean, when I were talking about lobbying, the money, to make one thing very clear, if a particular country wants to come to the United States and present its case, that's, I mean, nobody can object to that, But it needs to be done in the proper way. In other words, through diplomatic contacts, through meetings between officials, through perhaps representatives of that country coming to Congress, speaking there, doing those sort of things. What has caused the real harm, the enormous damage, is all of this

financial long being that has been taking place. You know, you spoke about, you know, the money that's come via Ukraine, much of it, not from Ukraine, by the way. Lots of other countries are involved in all that sort of thing as well. I mean, the Bob Menendez business, in fact, gave a great deal of insight into how it was done. All of that really has to be ended once and for all, and that this whole thing has to be brought under control. So the lobbying from the defence contractors and the lobbying from these outside governments and outside actors as well. Lobby should only be done by American citizens and it should be done in open and honest way and money should not play any part in it. I mean, if people want to come and argue their case

in Congress, or in Washington they can do it, but they can do it properly and openly using the force of argument, not the force of money. Yeah, just some final thoughts. If he does go the route of taking a look at Russia Gate, a huge task, by the way, it's massive. But I imagine if you start to unravel everything that happened with Russia Gate, you would probably get to a lot of the reasons or the reasoning why the Biden White House decided to push for Project Ukraine as well. I think a lot of project Ukraine and trying to get regime changes in Russia is buried away in some of the files or the documents of Russia. It's just a guess.

Absolutely. I agree with that. I share that guess. I mean, it's obviously a guess because we don't know, but I would agree with that, actually. Yeah. And just a final thought on China and Iran. So, I mean, we talked about Ukraine and what this signals. the new administration, what it signals for Ukraine, you definitely have a leaning of these people

appointed in Trump's cabinet, a neocan type of leaning, a war, a war hawk type of leading towards going after Iran and China. I believe China, at least looking at what Trump did in his first term, I think China is going to be more of that economic conflict and decoupling. That's what I believe. I don't know if he's going to go hard militarily against China. I don't know. But in his first term, there was a definite divorce that he was working towards with China. I think he's going to continue that. But Iran, your thoughts on China, but Iran is perhaps the one country where we could see some sort of military activity. I don't know if you... Yes, I do agree. And this is the most dangerous one of all for him, because I think with China, despite everything, despite the fact that we're going to be... we have all these China Hawks appearing. I think ultimately Trump doesn't want a war with China, and I think he's used there will prevail. And of this, I think he's got a lot of support, including from other members of his team. I mean, remember, Elon Musk is not going to be someone

who wants a conflict with China. So, I mean, you know, there are other contrary voices pushing back and arguing against that. So I think that we're not going to, you know, we're not going to to see a breakdown with China in the end, despite the fact that we could have some rather difficult moments. The Middle East is something else, because here we have the problem, which is in searching out and finding all of these people who are likely to support Trump in trying to do the various things that we've discussed. He's had to reach out to if, to do, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, to, To say simply, he's had to reach out to the grassroots of the Republican Party, to the kind of people who, you know, are not there the top leadership, the Mitch McConnell's and all of those, to people who are much closer to the grassroots of the party and who come from the kind of backgrounds that have are attuned to what. what Trump wants to do and who form, if you like, the spine of the political spine of the Maga

movement. Now, these people, to a man and woman, are very, very pro-Israel, very hostile to Iran. This isn't something that Trump has educated them to be. It is just what they are. I mean, you could see that going all the way back to the 1980s and beyond. So he's got to try and keep these people. I hope he does intent to keep these people under control because the risk he runs is that if they run away with things in the Middle East, we are going to get that big war in the Middle East. I mean, I'm afraid to say straightforwardly, the risk of that war has now grown. We are going to get that big war in the Middle East. The other neocons, the, you know, the Newland

Kagan-type neocons will, of course, support it. So will the rhinos. And of course, if that happens, it will throw everything else that Trump seems to be trying to do. Of course, the priorities The priority is Washington. It is not the Middle East. All right. We will end the video there. The durand.lopos.com. We are on Rumble Odyssey picture, telegram, Rock Finn, and X.

And go to the Duran Shop, pick up some merch like what we are wearing in this video today. The link to the Duran Shop is in the description box down below. Take care.