Podcast appearances and mentions of Bill Burns

 Marco Rubio and John Ratcliffe present their policy objectives in Senate confirmation hearings of their own. The difference between administrations is palpable. Do Merrick Garland or Bill Burns speak with the ease, focus and resolve as President Trump's cabinet nominees have thus far? And how did the senators do in yesterday's grilling? Listen to Blumenthal, Kennedy and Durbin and hear the obvious fear democrats have over being investigated. Which of Trump's cabinet nominees does the Deep State fear most? Deep Stater Mike Pence tries to derail RFK Jr's confirmation hearing.

Send us a textAs we draw this part 2 episode to close. Remember that Texas is a huge state and we have a huge diversity of grapes and wine. Do not be afraid to try what's out there or at different wineries, you never know what you may find you will love! 

Send us a textWe are kicking off Season 3 of We Know Texas Vino with a bang. We are sitting down with Chris and Bill and talking all things wine. Such a good conversation that it is going to be a 2 part show! You can also catch this whole episode on Youtube along with the video as well!

Join Mike, Matt and special guest Bill Burns as we decide the best video game controller in our yearly tradition of having a gaming holiday tournament bracket! Find out how your favorite controller did! Email us at thehalloffamepod@gmail.com Follow us @halloffamepod

Audio roundup of selected biopharma industry content from Scrip over the business week ended 13 December 2024. In this episode: a snapshot of the atopic dermatitis market; Bill Burns profile; GSK's Blenrep makes a comeback; CML results at ASH; and what's driving optimism on India. Playlist: soundcloud.com/citelinesounds/sets/scrips-five-must-know-things

On this week's episode of "Sights & Sounds," cosplayer Bill Burns gives his arts and culture suggestions happening in the Bay Area.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the Season 9 premiere of the Secrets & Spies podcast, hosts Chris Carr and Matt Fulton reveal exciting new plans for the show, including a transition to video. They dive into breaking stories, starting with the shocking failed ISIS attack at a Taylor Swift concert in Vienna—exposing the growing threat of teenage online radicalization. The episode also covers the arrest of Telegram founder Pavel Durov in France for failing to regulate harmful content, and the DOJ's exposure of ties between American influencers and Russian state media. Finally, they discuss a rare joint interview with CIA Director William Burns and SIS Chief Sir Richard Moore, offering insights into the historic US-UK intelligence collaboration amid rising global tensions. Tune in for expert analysis on terrorism, online extremism, and intelligence from the leaders shaping the global security landscape. Video version available on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/posts/espresso-martini-112014979 Articles discussed in today's episode "The Tortured Teens Department: What the Terror Plot Against a Taylor Swift Concert Tells Us About Youth Extremism" by Farah Pandith & Jacob Ware | US News & World Report "Who is Pavel Durov, the Russian-born Telegram founder arrested in France?" by Niha Masih | The Washington Post "U.S. Investigating Americans Who Worked With Russian State Television" by Steven Lee Myers & Julian E. Barnes | The New York Times CIA director Bill Burns and MI6 chief Richard Moore talk to FT editor Roula Khalaf | The Financial Times Click here to tune into our Patreon Show Extra Shot: https://www.patreon.com/posts/extra-shot-13-09-112015759. Support Secrets and Spies Take part in our anonymous listener survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/MSRSSSP. Become a “Friend of the Podcast” on Patreon for £3/$4: www.patreon.com/SecretsAndSpies Buy merchandise from our Redbubble shop: https://www.redbubble.com/shop/ap/60934996. Subscribe to our YouTube page: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDVB23lrHr3KFeXq4VU36dg. For more information about the podcast, check out our website: https://secretsandspiespodcast.com. Connect with us on social media Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/SecretsAndSpies Instagram: https://instagram.com/secretsandspies Blue Sky: https://bsky.app/profile/secretsandspies.bsky.social Facebook: https://facebook.com/secretsandspies Spoutible: https://spoutible.com/SecretsAndSpies Follow Chris and Matt on Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/ChrisCarrFilm https://twitter.com/FultonMatt Secrets and Spies is produced by Films & Podcasts LTD. Music by Andrew R. Bird

A magyar drónok egyelőre csökkentett teherrel repülnek Bitport     2024-09-10 08:00:00     Infotech Drón Van ugyan "dróntörvény", de a magyar gazdák még csak korlátozottan építhetnek a drónokra. Igaz, még tanulniuk is kell az önjáró gépek használatát. Sikeresen elindult az elmúlt évtizedek legambiciózusabb űrmissziója Telex     2024-09-10 11:25:19     Tudomány Világűr SpaceX A SpaceX Polaris Dawn küldetése során olyan messze állhatnak Föld körüli pályára az űrhajósok, mint még soha. Fél évszázada nem járt ember ilyen távol a bolygótól. Ketten űrsétát is fognak tenni. Kié a legtöbb műhold a Föld körül? Kiderült! ICT Global     2024-09-10 15:33:46     Infotech Világűr Elon Musk Tesla Műhold Twitter SpaceX A Tesla, a SpaceX és az X (Twitter) tulajdonosa megkerülhetetlen figurájává vált az új innovatív technológiáknak. Elon Musk politikai nézeteivel ugyan nem mindenki ért egyet, de tény, hogy az egykori dotcom milliárdos nélkül ma szinte elképzelhetetlen bármilyen fejlesztés. Befolyásának legújabb bizonyítéka, hogy a Föld körül keringő műholdak közel A Samsung még több Galaxy készülékre terjeszti ki az új szoftverfrissítését Márkamonitor     2024-09-10 05:39:04     Mobiltech Telefon Mesterséges intelligencia Okostelefon Samsung A szeptemberi bevezetéssel a Galaxy Z Fold6 és Z Flip6 okostelefonokon megismert mesterséges intelligencia funkciói a korábbi modelleken, köztük a Galaxy S24, S23, S23 Fe, Z Fold5, Z Flip5 és a Tab S9 szérián is elérhetővé válnak.   A Galaxy Ai segítségével egyszerűbbé és könnyedebbé válhat az idegen nyelvű kommunikáció. A Tolmács Hallgatási módja Tanulságos lehet a Trappist-1 vizsgálata Mínuszos     2024-09-10 07:33:52     Tudomány Világűr Az exobolygók kialakulásának megértésében, és Naprendszerünk történetének megismerésében is segíthet egy frissen publikált tanulmány, ami a Trappist-1 csillagrendszert vizsgálja. Az emberiség a történelem nagy részében csak az éjszakai égbolton látható bolygókat ismerte, az elmúlt harminc évben azonban olyan távcsöveket fejlesztettek ki, amelyek el A CIA és MI6 is generatív mesterséges intelligenciát vetett be ITBusiness     2024-09-10 05:05:39     Infotech Mesterséges intelligencia Titkosszolgálat Financial Times CIA A CIA igazgatója, Bill Burns és az MI6 vezetője, Richard Moore közösen írták meg a véleménycikket, amelyben bejelentették, hogy ügynökségeik generatív mesterséges intelligenciát használnak hírszerzési tevékenységeik támogatására és javítására. A Financial Times-ban megjelent beszámoló szerint, az MI-t arra képezik, hogy nagy mennyiségű adatból kivo A magyarok még nem érzik magukat készen a Mesterséges Intelligenciára Digital Hungary     2024-09-10 09:09:00     Infotech Mesterséges intelligencia Felmérés A Publicis Groupe Hungary és a GKID Research & Consulting által készített eddigi legátfogóbb magyar mesterséges intelligencia (MI) kutatás szerint Magyarország technológiai felkészültsége elmarad a globális átlagtól. A több mint 2000 fő részvételével készült reprezentatív felmérés eredményei azt mutatják, hogy bár a válaszadók 79%-a véli úgy, hogy A Google Térképen bukkanhattak ősi kráterre 24.hu     2024-09-10 05:10:09     Tudomány Világűr Google Kanada Térkép Meteor A kanadai férfi egy korábban ismeretlen aszteroidabecsapódás nyomára bukkanhatott. Eddig ismeretlen, kullancs által terjesztett vírust fedeztek fel PlanetZ     2024-09-10 08:21:57     Tudomány Oktatás Lyme-kór Kullancs Mongólia A wetland vírust (WELV) Mongóliában azonosították. Egy 61 éves férfi mutatott markáns tüneteket egy vizes élőhelyen történt kullancscsípés után. A vírus felfedezése újabb veszélyt jelent a kullancsok által terjesztett betegségek növekvő listáján, hangsúlyozva a felügyelet, közoktatás és a megelőző intézkedések fontosságát a közegészségügyben. A tud Apple Watch Series 10: vékonyabb, gyorsabb, strapabíróbb, szebb Liner     2024-09-10 12:37:28     Infotech Apple Okosóra Még számos jelző lenne, amit szívesen aggatnánk az Apple új okosórájára, hiszen meglepően sok újdonsággal érkezik. Elon Musk bejelentette, két év múlva űrhajót indítanak a Marsra hirado.hu     2024-09-10 04:15:00     Tudomány Világűr Elon Musk Mars SpaceX A SpaceX két év múlva indítja első legénység nélküli űrhajóját a Marsra. Elon Musk tweetelt, a Dogecoin kilőtt. A 0,11 dollár a következő állomás a mém érme számára? Kriptoworld     2024-09-10 06:37:49     Modern Gazdaság Elon Musk Érme Vendégbejegyzés Elon Musk egy olyan tweetet tett közzé, amely a Dogecoin-ra utal, emiatt pedig természetesen, már-már megszokott módon ismét emelkedett a mém érme ára. A Dogecoin körüli hangulat bikás, de a múltbeli veszteségek kitörléséhez fontos, hogy a $DOGE visszaszerezze a 0,11 dolláros szintet. Egy heti esés után a Dogecoin a közelmúltban ism Koreai robotokat használ a Hyundai Amerikában Autószektor     2024-09-10 11:11:18     Autó-motor USA Robot Hyundai Alkatrészüzem A Hyundai Transys hajtásláncokat és üléseket gyárt, és ellátja a Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Alabama (HMMA) járműszerelő üzemét. A részleg 2019-ben jött létre, amikor a Hyundai Dymos és a Hyundai Powertech egy egységként egyesítette erőit. Egy kísérleti projektet követően a Hyundai Transys a T300-as AMR-eket használja az alkatrészek gyártósorra tör A további adásainkat keresd a podcast.hirstart.hu oldalunkon.

The head of the CIA, Bill Burns has described Vladimir Putin as a bully who presents the greatest threat to world peace. The idea that Russia and China may partner to launch a joint provocation is a particular concern for the US and its allies. In this podcast, Samuel Ramani from the defence think tank RUSI provides his assessment of the risks associated with the so-called "no limits" partnership between China and Russia. The presenter is the usual host, Duncan Bartlett.

A magyar drónok egyelőre csökkentett teherrel repülnek Bitport     2024-09-10 08:00:00     Infotech Drón Van ugyan "dróntörvény", de a magyar gazdák még csak korlátozottan építhetnek a drónokra. Igaz, még tanulniuk is kell az önjáró gépek használatát. Sikeresen elindult az elmúlt évtizedek legambiciózusabb űrmissziója Telex     2024-09-10 11:25:19     Tudomány Világűr SpaceX A SpaceX Polaris Dawn küldetése során olyan messze állhatnak Föld körüli pályára az űrhajósok, mint még soha. Fél évszázada nem járt ember ilyen távol a bolygótól. Ketten űrsétát is fognak tenni. Kié a legtöbb műhold a Föld körül? Kiderült! ICT Global     2024-09-10 15:33:46     Infotech Világűr Elon Musk Tesla Műhold Twitter SpaceX A Tesla, a SpaceX és az X (Twitter) tulajdonosa megkerülhetetlen figurájává vált az új innovatív technológiáknak. Elon Musk politikai nézeteivel ugyan nem mindenki ért egyet, de tény, hogy az egykori dotcom milliárdos nélkül ma szinte elképzelhetetlen bármilyen fejlesztés. Befolyásának legújabb bizonyítéka, hogy a Föld körül keringő műholdak közel A Samsung még több Galaxy készülékre terjeszti ki az új szoftverfrissítését Márkamonitor     2024-09-10 05:39:04     Mobiltech Telefon Mesterséges intelligencia Okostelefon Samsung A szeptemberi bevezetéssel a Galaxy Z Fold6 és Z Flip6 okostelefonokon megismert mesterséges intelligencia funkciói a korábbi modelleken, köztük a Galaxy S24, S23, S23 Fe, Z Fold5, Z Flip5 és a Tab S9 szérián is elérhetővé válnak.   A Galaxy Ai segítségével egyszerűbbé és könnyedebbé válhat az idegen nyelvű kommunikáció. A Tolmács Hallgatási módja Tanulságos lehet a Trappist-1 vizsgálata Mínuszos     2024-09-10 07:33:52     Tudomány Világűr Az exobolygók kialakulásának megértésében, és Naprendszerünk történetének megismerésében is segíthet egy frissen publikált tanulmány, ami a Trappist-1 csillagrendszert vizsgálja. Az emberiség a történelem nagy részében csak az éjszakai égbolton látható bolygókat ismerte, az elmúlt harminc évben azonban olyan távcsöveket fejlesztettek ki, amelyek el A CIA és MI6 is generatív mesterséges intelligenciát vetett be ITBusiness     2024-09-10 05:05:39     Infotech Mesterséges intelligencia Titkosszolgálat Financial Times CIA A CIA igazgatója, Bill Burns és az MI6 vezetője, Richard Moore közösen írták meg a véleménycikket, amelyben bejelentették, hogy ügynökségeik generatív mesterséges intelligenciát használnak hírszerzési tevékenységeik támogatására és javítására. A Financial Times-ban megjelent beszámoló szerint, az MI-t arra képezik, hogy nagy mennyiségű adatból kivo A magyarok még nem érzik magukat készen a Mesterséges Intelligenciára Digital Hungary     2024-09-10 09:09:00     Infotech Mesterséges intelligencia Felmérés A Publicis Groupe Hungary és a GKID Research & Consulting által készített eddigi legátfogóbb magyar mesterséges intelligencia (MI) kutatás szerint Magyarország technológiai felkészültsége elmarad a globális átlagtól. A több mint 2000 fő részvételével készült reprezentatív felmérés eredményei azt mutatják, hogy bár a válaszadók 79%-a véli úgy, hogy A Google Térképen bukkanhattak ősi kráterre 24.hu     2024-09-10 05:10:09     Tudomány Világűr Google Kanada Térkép Meteor A kanadai férfi egy korábban ismeretlen aszteroidabecsapódás nyomára bukkanhatott. Eddig ismeretlen, kullancs által terjesztett vírust fedeztek fel PlanetZ     2024-09-10 08:21:57     Tudomány Oktatás Lyme-kór Kullancs Mongólia A wetland vírust (WELV) Mongóliában azonosították. Egy 61 éves férfi mutatott markáns tüneteket egy vizes élőhelyen történt kullancscsípés után. A vírus felfedezése újabb veszélyt jelent a kullancsok által terjesztett betegségek növekvő listáján, hangsúlyozva a felügyelet, közoktatás és a megelőző intézkedések fontosságát a közegészségügyben. A tud Apple Watch Series 10: vékonyabb, gyorsabb, strapabíróbb, szebb Liner     2024-09-10 12:37:28     Infotech Apple Okosóra Még számos jelző lenne, amit szívesen aggatnánk az Apple új okosórájára, hiszen meglepően sok újdonsággal érkezik. Elon Musk bejelentette, két év múlva űrhajót indítanak a Marsra hirado.hu     2024-09-10 04:15:00     Tudomány Világűr Elon Musk Mars SpaceX A SpaceX két év múlva indítja első legénység nélküli űrhajóját a Marsra. Elon Musk tweetelt, a Dogecoin kilőtt. A 0,11 dollár a következő állomás a mém érme számára? Kriptoworld     2024-09-10 06:37:49     Modern Gazdaság Elon Musk Érme Vendégbejegyzés Elon Musk egy olyan tweetet tett közzé, amely a Dogecoin-ra utal, emiatt pedig természetesen, már-már megszokott módon ismét emelkedett a mém érme ára. A Dogecoin körüli hangulat bikás, de a múltbeli veszteségek kitörléséhez fontos, hogy a $DOGE visszaszerezze a 0,11 dolláros szintet. Egy heti esés után a Dogecoin a közelmúltban ism Koreai robotokat használ a Hyundai Amerikában Autószektor     2024-09-10 11:11:18     Autó-motor USA Robot Hyundai Alkatrészüzem A Hyundai Transys hajtásláncokat és üléseket gyárt, és ellátja a Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Alabama (HMMA) járműszerelő üzemét. A részleg 2019-ben jött létre, amikor a Hyundai Dymos és a Hyundai Powertech egy egységként egyesítette erőit. Egy kísérleti projektet követően a Hyundai Transys a T300-as AMR-eket használja az alkatrészek gyártósorra tör A további adásainkat keresd a podcast.hirstart.hu oldalunkon.

Higher for longer interest rates are having profound effects on endowment and foundation portfolios across the US.The volatility this creates is making it more challenging to construct portfolios for the long-term and creating questions around liquidity management.Bill Burns and Meggan O'Shea join Texas Hemmaplardh in the latest episode of Critical Thinking recorded from the Mercer Global Investment Forum in Nashville, to discuss how these investors are navigating regime change.Opinions expressed are those of the speakers based on market conditions as of the date of recording, are subject to change without notice and do not necessarily reflect Mercer's opinions.This does not constitute an offer or a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell securities, commodities and/or any other financial instruments or products or constitute a solicitation on behalf of any of the investment managers, their affiliates. For the avoidance of doubt, this is not formal investment advice to allow any party to transact. Additional advice will be required in advance of entering into any contract.Read our full important notices - click here

Hamas pazartesi günü ateşkesi kabul ettiğini açıklamasına karşın, İsrail anlaşmanın istedikleri seviyede olmadığını ancak görüşmeler için Doha'ya heyet göndereceklerini açıkladı. Bununla birlikte Refah operasyonunun planlandığı gibi devam edeceğini söyleyerek Washington'ın istediklerine kulak asmaya niyeti olmadığını da gösterdi. CIA Direktörü Bill Burns'ün Doha görüşmeleri için bölgede olmasına ve Biden yönetiminin Refah operasyonuna açıkça karşı olmasına rağmen, Netanyahu hükümeti geri adım işareti vermiyor. Biden yönetiminin İsrail'e silah sevkiyatını dondurduğu ve bu yüzden Netanyahu'nun Refah operasyonunu geciktirdiği yönündeki haberler sonrasında Hamas'ın ateşkesi kabul etmesi kritik bir dönüm noktası teşkil ediyordu. Ancak Netanyahu'nun başından beri bu savaşı hem sürdürme hem de bölgesel olarak genişletme çabası, ateşkes çabalarının önündeki en büyük engel olarak öne çıkıyor. BİDEN SİLAH SEVKİYATINI DONDURDU Geçtiğimiz hafta sonu, Hamas'ın sadece ateşkese razı olmadığı ve savaşın bitirilmesinde ısrar ettiğinin basına yansıdığı bir aşamada, Netanyahu Refah'a her halükârda gireceklerini söylemişti. İsrail'in Doğu Refah'taki Gazzelilere bölgeyi boşaltmalarını söylemesi sonrasında operasyonun gerçekleşmesinin an meselesi olduğu düşünülüyordu. Bunun üzerine Hamas'ın ateşkesi kabul ettiğini açıklaması, Biden yönetiminin perde arkasında İsrail'e silah akışını dondurarak yaptığı baskının işe yarayacağını umduklarına işaret ediyordu. Ayrıca Hamas uzlaşmaz taraf olarak görünmekten kurtulmuş oluyordu. Ancak hem Netanyahu hükümeti hem de Amerika'daki İsrail taraftarları, Hamas teslim olmadıkça veya yok edilmedikçe nihai bir anlaşma olamayacağını savunarak zaten maksimalist bir pozisyon almışlardı.

Find me and the show on social media @DrWilmerLeon on X (Twitter), Instagram, and YouTube Facebook page is www.facebook.com/Drwilmerleonctd   Some articles referenced in the episode: Libertarian article: To End the War in Ukraine, Expose Its Core Lie | The Libertarian Institute Nato Watch article: How Gorbachev was misled over assurances against NATO expansion TruthOut article: The Ukraine Mess That Nuland Made | Truthout   FULL TRANSCRIPT: Announcer (00:06): Connecting the dots with Dr. Wilmer Leon, where the analysis of politics, culture, and history converge. Wilmer Leon (00:15): Welcome to the Connecting the Dots podcast with Dr. Wilmer Leon. I am Wilmer Leon and this is a special episode. Here's the point. We have a tendency to view current events as though they occur in a vacuum and we're failing to understand the broader historical context in which many of these events occur during each episode. Usually my guests and I have probing, provocative and in-depth discussions that connect the dots between these events and the broader historic context in which they occur, and this enables you to better understand and analyze the events that impact the global village in which we live on today's episode. The issue before us is what's really behind this most recent spate of military spending and is democracy really at risk? My guest for this discussion is me as the brilliant philosopher of the late Maurice White with Earth, wind and Fire said in all about love. (01:23) I want to take this moment to run down a couple of things about things we see every day. So in this episode it's just going to be you and I, president Joe Biden. On Wednesday the 24th of April, he signed into law the So-called Military Aid Package. It's worth $95 billion of your hard earned tax dollars. It includes nearly $61 billion that's going to Ukraine, $26 billion for Israel and $8 billion for the Indio Pacific. After signing the bill, president Biden said quote, it's a good day for America. It's a good day for Ukraine. It's a good day for world peace. The aid package, Biden said is going to make America safer. It's going to make the world safer, and it continues. America's leadership in the world. Is it and does it really well. So these statements by Biden, they're going to be kind of the broad outline of my comments for today. (02:43) What's really behind all of this money to Ukraine, Israel and the Indio Pacific, and is it an investment in safety or is it profit for the military industry? On January 17th, 1961 in his farewell address to the nation president Dwight Eisenhower, a former general and Republican warned the country and the world against the establishment of what he called the military industrial complex. Eisenhower said, and I quote, A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be might ready for instant action so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction. He was talking about a defensive military, not an offensive military. He went on to say American makers of plowshares could with time and as required make swords as well, but now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense. We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions and this is really the key, this conjunction, this is Eisenhower of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience, yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications in the councils of government. (04:28) We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought by the military industrial complex, the potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. I repeat that the potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist and that's what we see today. Eisenhower was incredibly prophetic in his concern of the dangers of American foreign policy becoming the ideological play thing of the arms industry. So coming out of World War II in 1945 coming out of the Korean conflict in 1953 and entering the Vietnam conflict around 1955 or 1956, it's very easy to understand Eisenhower's position on the need for a strong and prepared military. We're not going to debate that point. That could be a whole nother program, but with that, he admonished us not to fail to comprehend the grave implications, the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought by the military industrial complex. (05:57) So again, what's really behind all of this money to Ukraine, all this money to Israel, all this money to the Indio Pacific. Let's start with Ukraine and most of this will center around Ukraine because that's where a bulk of the money is going and that's also where for the most part, the most immediate risk of conflagration exists. There's a great piece that's published in the Libertarian Institute. It's entitled to end the War in Ukraine, expose its core lie to end the war in Ukraine, expose its core lie it's co-authored by Ted Snyder, a regular columnist on US foreign policy at antiwar and history at anti-war dot com as well as the Libertarian Institute and it's also it's co-authored by Professor Nikolai Petro. He's a political scientist at the University of Rhode Island and he's also the author of a number of books and since their piece is so well researched and so well written, I'm just going to quote from it, instead of trying to reinvent the wheel, they did a phenomenal job with this piece and I suggest everybody read it anyway. (07:19) They write. The essential argument used to avoid negotiation and continue support for the war in Ukraine is based upon a falsehood. They call it a falsehood. I call it a lie. That falsehood repeated by Joe Biden is that when Russian president Putin decided to invade Ukraine, he intended to conquer all of Ukraine and annihilated its falsity and this is Snyder and Petro its falsity has been exposed multiple times by military experts who have pointed out both before and after the invasion that Russia could not have intended to conquer all of Ukraine because it did not invade with sufficient forces to do so. Indeed, this was the key reason why senior Ukrainian officials and even President Zelensky himself argued just days before the invasion it would not occur. Now, I take issue with their use of the word invasion because it's really a military intervention, but again, that's a discussion for another time. (08:33) Folks, if you just strip away the rhetoric and the lies, and if you just look at the facts, the US started this fight with Russia and is using Ukraine as its proxy to do so. Schneider and Petro also have a piece, it's a shorter version of piece that I just referenced and it's entitled four Myths that Are Preventing Peace in Ukraine. Again, their work is so well researched and written, I'm just going to quote them again, I'm not going to try to reinvent the wheel they write. If diplomacy is to have a chance at settling the bloody conflict, then four persistent myths about Ukraine need to be exposed and refuted. Myth number one, Putin. I'm sorry, myth number one. If Putin is not defeated in Ukraine, he will roll into Europe. You've heard this many times. If Putin takes Ukraine, according to President Biden, he said this in Congress on the 6th of December, 2023, he won't stop there. He's going to keep going. He's made that pretty clear. (09:53) The problem with that statement is no evidence to support it has ever been presented. Petro and Snyder go continue, but Putin has not made that pretty clear. In fact, Putin has consistently said that the Ukraine crisis is not a territorial conflict. The issue is much broader and more fundamental and is about the principles of underlying the new international order. Simply put, it's about President Putin being concerned about Russian territorial security, sovereignty and integrity in the same manner that any other leader in the world is concerned about their territorial security, sovereignty and integrity. He's not doing anything different than what any other world leader would do. There's a piece@natowatch.com, I think.org, nato watch.org entitled How Gorbachev was Misled Over Assurances Against NATO expansion. And this piece that I'm referencing is kind of background to give you some greater context about what Schneider and Petro have written the US was trying to convince. The Soviet Union, this is back in the nineties, was trying to convince the Soviet Union to allow for the reunification of East and West Germany. (11:40) The then US Secretary of State, James Baker, his famous not one inch eastward assurance about NATO expansion while he was meeting within the president of Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev. This was on February 9th, 1990 was only a part of a cascade of similar assurances, meaning not only did James Baker say it, but other European leaders said this to Gorbachev as well. In February of 1990, baker assured the Soviet Union, and at the time he was the US Secretary of State under then President George HW Bush, he assured his counterpart Edward Chevron Nazi, that in a post Cold War Europe, NATO would no longer be belligerent, less of a military organization, much more of a political one, and then it would have no need for an independent capability. This is what the United States told the Soviet Union. Nonetheless, baker promised Shepherd Nazi ironclad guarantees that NATO's jurisdiction of forces would not move eastward meaning no closer to the then Soviet Union. (13:12) On the same day in Moscow. He famously told the Secretary General that the alliance would not move one inch to the East The following day, O Cole, the future chancellor of a United Germany repeated the same thought to Gorbachev even though they were disagreeing on other issues. Tillman Cole told Gorbachev not one inch eastward. That's what convinced Gorbachev to agree to the reunification of east and West Germany. I believe France, Britain and possibly one or two other European countries made the same assurances as well. And again, as a result of these insurances assurances, Germany was reunited the West NATO and Western allies or US allies have violated this agreement ever since. That's what's at the crux of the conflict. That's why when President Putin and President Biden met in Geneva, Switzerland before the Russian intervention, Putin told Biden, I'm giving you my security concerns in writing and I expect your response to my concerns to come back to me in writing. (14:46) He demanded the written response because Baker had stated the commitment verbally to Gorbachev. So now Putin wants this in writing and just quickly to those that say, oh, well, because it was just a statement and it was not written, it's not valid. Nene, I say to you, there's a case, I think it's Norway versus Greenland. It's a 19 35, 19 36 international law case that holds statements made by official representatives of states or countries are valid. They are enforceable. So the fact that Baker said it and didn't write it does not mean it's not valid. Again, according to Norway v Greenland, it's a 19 35, 19 36 international case. Okay with that. Now let's go back to Petro myth number two. Russia's invasion of Ukraine was never about nato. That's the myth that this has. The conflict in Ukraine has nothing to do with nato. Western officials insists that Russia's invasion of Ukraine was unprovoked and that Russia's decision to illegally invade Ukraine was never about NATO expansion and crossing Russia's red lines, but rather it's a senseless war against a sovereign freedom loving nation. (16:29) Petro Snyder continue. On the 7th of September of 2023, NATO's secretary Jens Stoltenberg made the stunning admission that Putin's decision to invade Ukraine was indeed provoked by NATO encroachment on Ukraine. The United States wanted to put missiles into Ukraine too close to the Russian border. Prior to making that decision to go into Ukraine, Stoltenberg said that Putin had sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent to us, Stoltenberg said and was a precondition for his not invading Ukraine. And Stoltenberg said, of course, we didn't sign that. Myth number three, the war in Ukraine is a war on democracy versus autocracy. According to this narrative, Russia cannot be allowed to win because this war is not just about Ukraine. It's the first battlefield in a larger war for democracy against autocracy. (17:55) But Russia abandoned the goal of exporting ideology when the Soviet Union collapsed. In fact, the Russian constitution, article 13 of the Russian constitution explicitly prohibits the imposition of a single state ideology and the exportation of such. And for those of you who will say, oh, you all didn't know Russia has a constitution, president Putin is bound by that constitution. Russia has a parliament, they have a democracy. Vladimir Putin, contrary to popular belief and narrative is not an autocrat. He's no more of an autocrat than Joe Biden is an autocrat and some would tell you that Joe Biden is an autocrat. But anyway, this and this is my input. If the US is spending billions of your taxpayer dollars to defend democracy, then why did the United States go in and overthrow the democratically elected government of President Victor Jankovich in Ukraine in 2014? To that point, there is a piece in truth out the Ukraine mess that Newland made. (19:18) You can find this in truth out the Ukraine mess that Newland made assistant Secretary of State at the time, Victorian Newland engineered Ukraine's regime change without weighing its likely consequences. This is by Robert Perry, a RRY, as the Ukrainian army squares off against ultra-right, and neo-Nazi militias in the west and violence against ethnic Russians continues in the East, the obvious folly of the Obama administration's Ukraine policy has come into focus even for many who tried to ignore the facts or what many have called the mess that Victoria Newland made assistant Secretary of state for European affairs. Tor Newland was the mastermind behind the February 22nd, 2014 regime change in Ukraine, plotting the overthrow of the democratically elected government of President Victor Jankovich while convincing the ever gullible us mainstream media that the coup wasn't really a coup but a victory for democracy folks. She worked with Nazis in Ukraine to overthrow the democratically elected Jankovich government in 2014. (20:51) It's called the ma don coup or ma don coup. Look it up, M-A-I-D-O-N. Everything I'm telling you right now, you can verify for yourselves. In fact, I implore you to do so. I'm not just taking this stuff off the top of my head. This is not my opinion. If it is my opinion, I will tell you that it is. This is historic fact. Myth number four, Putin again, this is Snyder and Petro Putin is not interested in negotiating. The West insists that Putin is not interested in negotiating an end to this conflict despite multiple news reports that he has been signaling through intermediaries that he is open to a ceasefire and that he is ready to make a deal. The White House continues to insist that he has shown absolutely no indication he's willing to negotiate. And that's just not true. My opinion, that's just not well, that's a fact. (22:08) He my opinion is not interested in negotiating based upon the usual tactic that the United States uses. The United States usual tactic of negotiation is capitulation. The United States comes to the table and says, here's how it's going to go. And once you agree to how we believe it's going to go, then we can sit down and talk about it. And Putin's saying, no ne nay, I'm not going to do that. You want to negotiate this. We're going to sit down and negotiate this. And that's one of the big problems. My opinion, again, that's one of the big problems that the United States has with dealing with a peer such as Russian president, Putin back to Petro. But the historical record shows that Putin has sought a negotiated settlement since the opening days of conflict. And by all accounts, Russia and Ukraine had even reached a tentative agreement in Istanbul in April of 2022. And that has been confirmed by American reporting by then Israeli Prime Minister Neftali Bennett by former German chancellor, Gerhard Schroeder by Turkish Foreign Minister, and Newman Tuus, sorry for that struggle with those names. He's the deputy chairman of Erdogan, Turkish president of Erdogan's party. In fact, former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, he went to Ukraine and told Zelensky in April of 22, under no circumstance is the West going to allow you to negotiate a settlement with Russia. (24:29) I say that again as the United States says that Russia has no interest in negotiating. They were already negotiating and they had reached an agreement. And there have been some instances, some press conferences where Putin has held up the agreement and said, I got it right here. But Bojo Boris Johnson went and told on behalf of the West, went and told Zelensky, under no circumstances is the West going back that play. So if Putin isn't interested in negotiating, negotiating, why did he participate in the mens agreements, the series of international agreements which sought to end the Donbass conflict that was fought between armed Ukrainian, pro-Russian separatist groups and the armed forces of Ukraine. Folks look up the Minsk accords. And when you look up the Minsk accords, here's the problem. You can find this at the World Socialist website. You can find this a number of places former German chancellor, Angela Merkel Min, that the mins accords or the mins agreement was merely to buy time for Ukraine's arms buildup. The 2024 Minsk agreement was an attempt to give Ukraine time. Merkel told a German newspaper, it was also used. They also used that time to become stronger as you can see today. (26:16) And Angela Merkel was one of the key conveners of the Minsk meetings under the pretext of negotiating a settlement between what were called the ethnic Russians in the Donbass region and the rest of Ukraine. See, once you had the 2014 Midon coup and the Yakovich government was thrown out, then a pro Ukrainian nationalist Western leaning government backed by Nazis in Ukraine was implemented. And they then, because they were Ukrainian nationalists, they started ethnically cleansing what were called ethnic Russians in what's known as the Donbas region of Ukraine. And those folks in the Donbas were begging President Putin to intervene on their behalf. They're Ukrainian citizens with Russian background, Russian families, many of them speak Russian. They are members of the Russian Orthodox Church. They travel back and forth between the Donbass and Russia because they have families in Russia. But the Ukrainian nationalists wanted to ethnically cleanse them from the country. (27:50) And so in order to stop the conflict, they came to what was called the mens accords, which is why if you go back and look at the record, you'll see Putin telling Biden before he went into Ukraine, all you got to do is implement the Minsk agreement and we're good. All you've got to do is implement the Minsk agreement. And I'm not going in. We've already negotiated this. All you have to do is implement it. And the United, he told that to Biden when they were in Sweden in Geneva, you can look it up. The United States ignored it. So folks, this is a cursory view, cursory overview of the situation. You can research this for yourselves. Tony Blinken, Joe Biden, even Malcolm Nance, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, they're all lying to you. This is not about defending democracy, it's not about stopping the further advance of Russia. It's all about selling weapons around the world and they're using your nickel to do it. (29:22) Of the $60.7 billion that's going to Ukraine, $38.8 billion isn't going to Ukraine. It's going to US factories that make missiles, munitions, and other military gear. It's going to replenish the United States military stocks that have been depleted as a result of this fool's errand called Ukraine. It's going to Lockheed Martin, it's going to General Dynamics, it's going to General Electric, it's going to Boeing, it's going to Raytheon, it's going to a whole lot of other American arms manufacturers or as Eisenhower refer to them, the military industrial complex. And I'm not making these numbers up. You can look it up. This came from an Associated Press story and guess where the Associated Press got their numbers? They got their numbers from the Biden administration. So again, not my opinion, it's the facts. There's a great summary at the World Socialist website. (30:48) I referenced the story a little earlier in this piece, but if you're asking yourself, so what's the motivation behind the United States for using Ukraine as its proxy to confront Russia? The summary is as follows, since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States has pursued the goal of remaining the sole world power. To this end, Washington has waged numerous criminal wars and expanded NATO into Eastern Europe. Now it wants to integrate Ukraine, Georgia, and other former Soviet republics into NATO and subjugate Russia in order to plunder its resources and isolate China. You may have heard the pivot towards China from the Obama administration. That's what this isolation of China is all about. It's a pivot away from Afghanistan, a pivot away from a conflict with Russia, and the focus is on China. So the 61 billion in aid to Ukraine, the 26 billion for Israel, the $8 billion for the Pacific, those are your tax dollars with infrastructure crumbling in the United States, healthcare, pensions, education, we don't have the money to deal with those things as the rate of suicide is up in the United States as the rate of depression is up in the United States as inflation is ravaging the pocketbooks of the middle class and the working class and the poor in this country, they got 95 billion of your tax dollars that they can send to Ukraine now 26 billion for Israel. (33:09) What a mess that is contrary to the dominant narrative. This conflict did not start on the 7th of October. In fact, there's a piece in the publication in these times entitled History didn't Begin on October 7th. The Israeli military is currently carrying out an attack on the besieged Gaza Strip bombing homes, bombing mosques, bombing hospitals, churches cutting off access to water, assassinating children, assassinating doctors. They're cutting off electricity, they're cutting off food. The Palestinian death toll has risen to over 35,000. 70% of those 35,000 are women and children, 80% of GA's, 2.3 million residents have been displaced GA's and suffer untreated injuries and a continual lack of medical supplies. (34:28) While this collective punishment, which by the way violates international law, has been justified by right wingers. Israeli defense minister Yoav Glan called Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip human animals and US Senator Lindsey Graham, the Republican from South Carolina that's never met, a war he didn't like, called for the military to level the place in a sitting American senator has called upon the Israeli government to level Gaza, which by the way is in violation of American law because Israel is using American money and American weapons to ethnically cleanse, to collectively punish, to engage in genocide against the Palestinian people. Look up the Lehe law, thehe Amendment, look it up. Look up the Arms Export Control Act, and you'll see very clearly that the United States is in violation of its own law by providing weapons to Israel. While it's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, while it's defense Minister Gallant and others have stated very clearly that they are engaging in genocide. (36:16) Now, as I talk about this and as I talk about what Hamas' response, Hezbollah's response in Lebanon, ansara Allah in Yemen, I'm not saying this to condone violence or to condone killing in no way, shape or form, but you have to understand the context in which these actions and reactions are taking place. Dr. King told us many times that war is an enemy of the poor, and he also talked about the three evils of society are racism, militarism, and poverty about racism. He said, if America does not respond creatively to the challenge to banish racism, some future historian will have to say that a great civilization died because it lacked the soul and commitment to make justice a reality for all men. That not only applies to how the United States government treats Native Americans, that not only applies to how the United States government treats Mexican and other Latino or Hispanic immigrants. That does not only apply to how the United States treats African-Americans, it applies to how the United States spends and spends its money to back fund and organize genocide against the Palestinians. (38:03) The second evil was militarism. And Dr. King said, A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death. 95 billion sent of our tax dollars to foreign countries for war, for oppression to maintain this unitary or unilateral hegemony that the United States has become used to since World War II and our bridges are collapsing. You have people in the United States that are having to decide between do they pay their rent, do they pay their mortgage, or do they pay their grocery bill? And that takes us into the third element, the third evil of society that Dr. King talked about poverty where he says the poor black and white are still perishing on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. What happens to a dream deferred? It leads to bewildering frustration and corroding bitterness. (39:29) The people cry for freedom and the Congress attempts to legislate repression. They just voted to send $95 billion of your tax dollars to oppress another people, repress another people, Dr. King, millions. Yes, billions are appropriated for mass murder. That's not me, that's Dr. King for mass murder. But the most meager pittance of foreign aid for international development is crushed in the surge of reaction. Unemployment rages at a major depression level in the black ghettos, but the bipartisan response is an anti-riot bill rather than a serious poverty program. Or you've got Mike Johnson going to Columbia calling for the arrest of protesting students that are protesting what? They're not protesting against Judaism. They're not protesting against Israelis, they're protesting against genocide and they're protesting for the freedom and the rights of Palestinians at the time that he gave this speech, which I think was 1968, right before he died, $26 billion. (40:56) I'm sorry, this is me now, my problem, my mistake, 26 billion of your tax dollars are being invested in the genocide of the Palestinian people. Context, folks. Context is incredibly, incredibly important here. I'm not going to go through the 75 years of apartheid and oppression right now that's going on in pal. I'm not going to go through that right now. Let's just look at some of the most recent incidents. According to Chatham House, the Israeli attack on Iran's consulate in Damascus on the 1st of April. You remember Israel sent missiles into Damascus, Syria and struck the Iranian consulate in Damascus, killing an Iranian general and a number of other diplomats. That's unprecedented. That's an unprecedented escalation by Israel against Iran in Syria, an unprecedented escalation. Folks, it's a violation of international law for one country to attack the embassy or the consulate of another country, and they did it on Syrian soil, which means they also violated Syrian sovereignty. (42:37) What did Iran do after consultation with the United States and agreement with the United States? Some say it was Bill Burns from the CIA A with the US and other countries in the region and based upon and consistent with international law. That's a very, very important point here is that after Israel on April 1st illegally struck the Iranian consulate in Syria, Iran did not just react in a knee-jerk manner. They didn't just send a barrage of missiles into Tel Aviv. They sat down and they spoke with the United States and they said, look, we can't allow this to stand. (43:29) We just can't sit I lead by anymore and let them do this to us. So here's what we're going to do Based upon international law, we are allowed to retaliate rarely. When you read about this in the newspaper, does it say that Iran retaliated against Israel? What they usually, how they usually describe it, and this is why context is important, they usually describe it as Iran struck Israel. Iran attacked Israel. No, they retaliated. And under international law, what you are allowed to do is you are allowed to strike military targets that were tied to the offensive strike that you endured, and you're also allowed through international law to strike support targets well such as radar towers, communication facilities. And so Iran sat down, I think it was Bill Burns from the CCIA A and Bill Burns said to Iran, okay, so long as you don't hit civilian targets, we the United States will not respond. So what did Iran do? (45:02) They retaliated as international law allows them to, and when they finished, they even gave the United States and Israel the heads up. They said In five hours, this is what we're going to do. And they used these slow moving drones so that the United States and Israeli radar could track the drones. They even gave them time to get their newly acquired F 35 jet fighter planes that they had just gotten from the United States out of harm's way. They did all of that to make a point, and when they were finished, they said, we now consider the matter closed. You struck us. We retaliated we're good, but Israel wasn't satisfied. (46:10) And what did Israel do? They struck again in violation of international law. Fortunately, president Raisi as well as Supreme Leader, Khomeini and others in the Iranian government, fortunately they are thoughtful. Fortunately, they have a longer view of history than Americans do. Fortunately, they exercised restraint and they have not struck back. Think about that context, folks. Context is very important. President Biden tells us that we're protecting security and democracy in Israel. Here's the newsflash. There's nothing secure about Israel and there's nothing democratic about a colony that oppresses over 30%. Its population. Palestinians do not have the same rights to vote as Israelis do. Palestinians do not have the same right to travel throughout the country as Israelis do. (47:46) Many Palestinians have been relegated to living in an open air concentration camp called the Gaza Strip, where their caloric intake is monitored and managed by the Israeli government. Their access to water, their access to electricity is managed by the Israeli government. That's not democracy. That's not even humanity. It's called genocide. And your tax dollars are being used to fund it. There's nothing democratic about a United States that is arresting students for peacefully protesting against genocide. Now, over 40 colleges and universities are engaged in protests. The University of Southern California in Los Angeles has canceled graduation. They are not allowing, well, the first thing they did was they decided that the valedictorian of the class of 2024, a Palestinian American woman was not going to be allowed to give her valedictorian address and they claim due to security concerns. So instead of protecting her and allowing her to give her speech, they have been held hostage by threat, by innuendo, by social media posts. Think about that. (49:29) Over 40 colleges and universities are now engaged in protests and presidents of these universities are calling out the police. They were arresting students. Mike Johnson, the speaker of the house, just went to Columbia University and threatened or called for the resignation of the President of Columbia because she's not following the script. And to show you how prevalent this has become, there are now high school students, high school students in Washington DC at Jackson Reed High School, the largest high school in the District of Columbia. They have had to file a lawsuit being represented by ACL U. They have filed a lawsuit against their principal saying that the principal has infringed upon their first amendment rights by barring them from holding pro-Palestinian events and distributing information materials. So apparently the First Amendment doesn't apply if your speech is in support of those that the Israeli lobby deems to be offensive. (51:06) And for those of you listening to this that say that this is an anti-Semitic analysis, no, it's not. It's anti-Zionist is what it is. And contrary to what they have now wanted to say from Congress and what many backing the Israeli lobby will tell you, Zionism and Judaism are not the same thing. Look it up. Don't take my word for it. Zionism is a political ideology that is racist, that is white supremacists and is used as the basis for genocide against the Palestinians, whereas Judaism is a religious belief system. Two totally different things. Finally, what the United States loves to call the Indio Pacific, basically what they're doing is trying to start a war with China, and they're using the island of Taiwan as the United States has used Ukraine as its proxy to start a war with Russia. The United States is using the island of Taiwan in a similar manner, and fortunately, president Xi of China is thoughtful, patient, reserved, and is not responding to the provocations as the United States would do if China were trying to do to Puerto Rico or trying to do through Puerto Rico. What the United States is trying to do to China through Taiwan, missiles would be flying and bullets would be shot. (53:17) But G is a wise man and he's not falling for the banana in the trick. He's not going to allow the United States to provoke his country into a conflict. So the United States is engaging in military exercises with South Korea. The United States is engaged in military exercises with Japan. The United States is engaged in military exercises with the Philippines. The United States is building more military bases in along the Pacific Rim. All of this, and heaven knows why, because it's a fight. The US can win. We don't have the technology, we don't have the technology that they have. We don't have the capacity, the capability, the hypersonic missiles. Look, the United States going back to the Iranian, I'm sorry, going back to, yeah, the Gaza conflict, the United States sends in the USS Eisenhower, was it Gerald Ford? I think it was the Gerald Ford. They send in the Gerald Ford carrier Group into the Mediterranean off the coast of Israel. And President Putin says to Biden, he says, why are you doing this? He says, you're not scaring anybody. These people don't scare. He says, oh, and by the way, we Russia can sink your aircraft carrier from here with hypersonic missiles. (55:26) Hypersonic missiles. These things fly at something like nine times, 10 times the speed of sound they have, I think it's the SU 35, which is a fighter jet that Russia has, and they're called Kja. I think it's K-I-N-J-A-L, Ken jal missiles. Look it up. They can sink the carrier from the Black Sea before the carrier even recognizes that the missiles are incoming. That thing is on its way. That carrier is on its way to the bottom of the Mediterranean before they even know that the missiles are incoming, and China has the technology as well. Some say that Iran has the technology. (56:20) So folks, why are your tax dollars being used being wasted when there is such drastic need at home? And this is not a Republican or a Democratic issue. Democratic, this is a NeoCon, and you got Republican and Democratic neocons. This is a NeoCon issue. They are lying to you about the rationales and the so-called logic that they are employing so that it's a money laundering scheme, is what it is. The United States through its proxy, Ukraine starts a conflict with Russia so that the Biden administration can tell you that we have to increase our military spending to stop the fight with Russia to stop the war in Ukraine, to defend the Ukrainians. Well, if you hadn't started the fight in the first place, there wouldn't be a fight. (57:57) Joe Biden tells us we have to defend security and democracy in Israel as the United States Arms funds, trains, provides logistics support to the Israeli government as it engages in genocide against the Palestinians. It's very simple. Joe, if you want to bring a stop to this as you ring your hands and cry, crocodile tears about protecting innocent Palestinian civilians, pick up the phone. Tell Benjamin Netanyahu, you don't get another damn dime. Very simple, very simple. The way you end the fight is don't start the fight in the first place. The United States is trying to provoke a war with China over Taiwan, even though it is clearly stated, articulated by then President Nixon, secretary of State, Kissinger, the one China policy. The United States considers Taiwan to be a part of China. The UN recognizes Taiwan is a part of China. The majority of Taiwanese believe support that they are Chinese citizens. If you don't want to have a fight with China, then don't provoke the fight with China, as they say on the corner. Don't start nothing. Won't be nothing. So folks, here's what you really need to think about. What does this mean? I just went through Ukraine. I just went through Israel. I just went through the conflict with China, and what does this mean? What's at stake? Well, first of all, world War iii. Remember, Russia is a nuclear armed country. China, I believe, has nuclear weapons. Israel, that's the worst kept secret in the world, is a nuclear armed country. So the United States as a nuclear power is trying to start a conflict with other nuclear powers. A nuclear war is unwinnable by anybody. Everybody loses in the course of a nuclear war, (01:01:06) Even if the war doesn't go nuclear. Look at all the resources that have been wasted that could have been used to make America truly safer. When our infrastructure is sound, the country is safer. When our children are better educated, our country is safer. When you have social security, our country is safer. Why can't we have the healthcare, the mental healthcare, the family care that this $95 billion, and that's just the most recent of the So-called aid bills. That's just the most recent of them, 95 billion. Where could that money go, and what could that money do to help you life easier to ensure a better standard of living for you? (01:02:32) What could be done with that money instead of being used to fund a fight that the United States started? Again, don't start. Nothing won't be nothing. But when militarism is all you have, what is the adage? When your only solution is a hammer, every problem is a nail. When militarism is your solution, every problem is a conflict. And oh, by the way, you're starting the conflict. So folks, in all the stuff that I've said over this past hour, if you heard that on M-S-N-B-C, have you heard that on CNN? Have you heard that on Fox News? Probably not. But when you do a little research, you'll find everything I've said to you is true. (01:03:45) The truth is the light. So again, this is on you because this is impacting you, and you've got to start at the local level, starting with your city council, starting with your state and local government and working its way up. You've got to look at what those kids are doing on college campuses and on high school campuses. Now they are getting engaged. Now, I'm not saying you got to pitch a tent on somebody's lawn, and no, there are a myriad of ways that you can reengage in the process, but it starts with reading. So with that, I say to you, I got to thank my guest, who by the way, is me. Thank you all so much for listening to the Connecting the Dots podcast with me, Dr. Wilmer Leon. Stay tuned for new episodes every week. Also, please follow and subscribe. Go to patreon.com/wilmer leon and contribute. Please contribute. It costs to produce this program every week. We could do more programs in the week if we had the funding to do so. So please contribute. Go to patreon.com/wilmer Leon, leave a review, share the show, follow us on social media. You can find all the links below in the show description. And remember that this is where the analysis of politics, culture, history, converge, talk without analysis is just chatter, and we don't chatter here on connecting the dots. See you again next time. Until then, I'm Dr. Wilmer Leon. Have a great one. Peace Announcer (01:06:11): Connecting the dots with Dr. Wilmer Leon, where the analysis of politics, culture, and history converge.

Vous aimez notre peau de caste ? Soutenez-nous ! https://www.lenouvelespritpublic.fr/abonnement Une émission de Philippe Meyer, enregistrée au studio l'Arrière-boutique le 25 avril 2024. Avec cette semaine : Nicolas Baverez, essayiste et avocat. François Bujon de l'Estang, ambassadeur de France. Nicole Gnesotto, vice-présidente de l'Institut Jacques Delors. Richard Werly, correspondant à Paris du quotidien helvétique Blick. LA RELATION DES FRANÇAIS À L'UNION EUROPÉENNE Les sondages effectués par la Commission ou le Parlement européen auprès des citoyens européens montrent un intérêt réel des Français pour l'Europe conforté par une participation en nette hausse des Français aux dernières élections européennes de 2019 (50,12%), contre 40,6% en 2009 et 42,4% en 2014. D'après l'Eurobaromètre de la Commission européenne réalisé en février-mars 2021, 57% des Français se déclarent attachés à l'Union européenne, soit une hausse de 4 points par rapport à l'été 2020. De plus, selon l'Eurobaromètre du Parlement européen du printemps 2021 la grande majorité des Français estiment que la voix de la France compte dans l'UE (75%). L'étude de la Fondation Jean Jaurès et du Cevipof en partenariat avec Ipsos et Le Monde, baptisée « Fractures françaises », publiée en octobre 2022, montre néanmoins, que le niveau de confiance en l'institution européenne varie en fonction de l'affiliation politique de la personne interrogée et de sa catégorie socioprofessionnelle. Sans surprise, les sympathisants des partis ayant un discours et un programme pro-européens sont les plus enclins à se dire confiants en l'UE : ceux du Parti socialiste (68%), d'Europe Ecologie-Les Verts (73%) et de La République en marche (devenu Renaissance, 87%) figurent en tête. De surcroît, l'étude met en exergue une différence de perception en fonction de la catégorie socioprofessionnelle d'appartenance. Les ouvriers se disent beaucoup moins confiants en l'UE (36%) que les cadres (63%), et les professions intermédiaires, les employés et les retraités se situent à un niveau comparable à celui de la population générale. En mars 2023, 71% des Français se sont déclarés en faveur de l'euro (71% dans l'ensemble de l'Union), 69% en faveur d'une politique de défense et de sécurité commune (77% dans l'ensemble de l'Union), 64% déclarent être satisfaits de la réponse apportée par l'Union européenne en soutien à l'Ukraine (69% dans l'ensemble de l'Union) et 64% pensent que les actions de l'Union européenne ont un impact sur leur vie quotidienne (71% dans l'ensemble de l'Union). En revanche, 54% des Français ne sont pas satisfaits de la manière dont l'Union a géré les enjeux de migration et d'asile (50% dans l'ensemble de l'Union), 50% ne sont pas satisfaits du « Green Deal » de l'Union européenne (43% dans l'ensemble de l'Union). Pour l'instant, l'intérêt déclaré des citoyens pour les élections européennes est faible en France : 40% sont intéressés contre 56% dans l'ensemble de l'Union. Un niveau équivalent à celui de la Bulgarie (41%) très éloigné de celui de l'Allemagne (65%). Selon la dernière enquête Eurobaromètre publiée le 17 avril, 52% des Français interrogés se disent pessimistes sur l'avenir de cette Union que leur pays a œuvré à forger. Jeudi, à un mois et demi des élections européennes, Emmanuel Macron a prononcé à Paris un nouveau discours sur l'Europe. LE DÉBLOCAGE DES MILLIARDS AMÉRICAINS POUR L'UKRAINE Après de longues et difficiles tractations, le 20 avril, la Chambre américaine des représentants dans un vote bipartisan a adopté par 310 voix pour - dont 101 républicaines - contre 112, un grand plan d'aide à l' Ukraine, Israël et Taïwan. L'enveloppe de 95 milliards de dollars, dont 61 milliards pour l'Ukraine, était réclamée depuis des mois par le président Joe Biden. Quelques minutes après le vote, le président ukrainien a estimé que l'aide américaine « sauvera des milliers et des milliers de vies ». Le président Joe Biden a salué l'« aide cruciale » à Israël et l'Ukraine, comme étant au « rendez-vous de l'Histoire ». Le Kremlin a dénoncé l'aide américaine qui « tuera encore plus d'Ukrainiens à cause du régime de Kyiv ». Le Congrès américain n'avait pas adopté de grande enveloppe pour son allié depuis décembre 2022, principalement en raison de querelles partisanes. Le plan d'aide à l'Ukraine inclut 14 milliards de dollars pour les systèmes de défense américains, 13 milliards de dollars pour reconstituer aux États-Unis les stocks d'armes déjà données à l'Ukraine, 7 milliards de dollars pour les opérations militaires américaines dans la région et 9,5 milliards de dollars d'aide économique. Il autorise le président Biden à confisquer et à vendre des actifs russes, pour qu'ils servent à financer la reconstruction de l'Ukraine - une idée qui fait également son chemin auprès d'autres pays du G7. Après des mois de tergiversations, le chef républicain de la Chambre, Mike Johnson, a fini par apporter son soutien, sous les huées d'élus trumpistes, hostiles à une telle aide. « Pour le dire franchement : je préfère envoyer des munitions à l'Ukraine qu'envoyer nos garçons se battre », a-t-il plaidé. Deux jours avant le vote, le directeur de la CIA, Bill Burns avait déclaré « sans aide supplémentaire, le risque est réel que les Ukrainiens perdent sur le champ de bataille d'ici à la fin de 2024 ». Depuis le début de l'année et le tarissement des crédits américains, l'armée ukrainienne s'est retrouvée de plus en plus en difficulté. Les forces russes grignotaient mois après mois du terrain. L'Europe ne parvenait pas à compenser les obus et les missiles manquant à l'Ukraine. Le 7 avril, le président Zelensky a, pour la première fois, affirmé que son pays « perdra[it] la guerre » si l'aide promise par les Etats-Unis restait bloquée au Congrès, expliquant que ses troupes pouvaient tirer un obus quand les Russes en envoyaient dix. Même tardif, le vote américain a été salué en Europe. La ministre des affaires étrangères allemande Annalena Baerbock a évoqué « un jour d'optimisme », son homologue italien parle d'un « tournant décisif ». Le président du Conseil européen, Charles Michel, s'est quant à lui réjoui de ce « message clair envoyé au Kremlin ». « Mieux vaut tard que trop tard », a commenté le premier ministre polonais Donald Tusk. Le retard de Washington pour débloquer cette aide a permis à la Russie de reprendre l'initiative sur le terrain. Mardi, le projet de loi a été adopté par le Sénat américain par 79 voix pour et 18 contre. Chaque semaine, Philippe Meyer anime une conversation d'analyse politique, argumentée et courtoise, sur des thèmes nationaux et internationaux liés à l'actualité. Pour en savoir plus : www.lenouvelespritpublic.fr

Follow this week's guest Scott Ritter on X/Twitter @RealScottRitter and his substack http://scottritterextra.com/ and read his latest article here: https://consortiumnews.com/2024/04/15/scott-ritter-the-missiles-of-april/ Find me and the show on social media @DrWilmerLeon on X (Twitter), Instagram, and YouTube Facebook page is www.facebook.com/Drwilmerleonctd   FULL TRANSCRIPT: Announcer (00:06): Connecting the dots with Dr. Wilmer Leon, where the analysis of politics, culture, and history converge. Wilmer Leon (00:14): Welcome to the Connecting the Dots podcast with Dr. Wilmer Leon, and I'm Wilmer Leon. Here's the point. We have a tendency to view current events as though they happen in a vacuum, failing to understand the broader historical context in which they occur. During each episode, my guests and I have probing, provocative, and in-depth discussions that connect the dots between current events in the broader historic context in which they happen, enabling you to better understand and analyze the events that impact the global village in which we live on today's episode. The issue before it says, what can we expect next? Now that Iran has responded militarily to Israel's attack on the Iranian consulate in Syria for insight into this, let's turn to my guest. He's a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD. His most recent book is entitled Disarmament in the Time of Parika, and he is of course, Scott Ritter. As always, Scott, welcome to the Connecting the Dots podcast with Wilmer Leon. Scott Ritter (01:37): Well, thanks for having me. Wilmer Leon (01:39): So Pepe Escobar wrote the following. He called it the Shadow Play, and he writes, so this is how it happened. Burns met an Iranian delegation in Oman. He was told the Israeli punishment was inevitable, and if the US got involved, then all US bases will be attacked and the Rai of Horus would be blocked. Burns said, we do nothing if no civilians are harmed. The Iranians said it will be a military base or an embassy. The CIA said, go ahead and do it. Scott Ritter, you've been writing about these issues in Iran for over 20 years. First, your assessment of Pepe Escobar's assessment. Scott Ritter (02:29): Well, I mean, clearly Pepe, he is a journalist. He is a journalist of some renno, and he has a source and he's reporting it. It's plausible. I can't confirm it. I can't sit here and say, I know that this happened. I have no idea if this happened. I do know that the CIA has over the course of time, taken on a shadow diplomacy role because the State Department in implementing America's hegemonic policies has alienated America with so many nations and that normal diplomatic relations are impossible. And so the CIAs assume this responsibility. Indeed, this is why William Burns was selected by Joe Biden to be the director of the CIA. He's not a CIA hand, he's not a man who has involved. He's a diplomat, former ambassador to Russia, and he's a man who has written a book called The Back Channel, which describes his approach, the back channel approach to resolving things. Burns has carried out similar meetings with Russia when trying to reopen arms control venues or talk about possible prisoner exchanges. (03:55) It's burns that takes the lead on these things. The CIA has played an important role in the past in facilitating dialogue between the Palestinians and the Israelis. The CIA had a very big role to play in making that happen. The CIA was behind the secret negotiations with the Taliban that led to the American withdrawal. So would it surprise me that the CIA has connectivity with Iran? Absolutely not. Especially given Burns' role and the importance of the back channel to the Biden administration. I think the Israelis might find it somewhat of a shock that the United States green lit the Iranian response. But then again, we're living in very strange times where the lack of, let's just call it the deterioration of relations between the United States and Israel is real. I've said for some time now that no American president or presidential candidate has won the White House by turning his back on Israel. (05:09) And I've also noted that no Israeli Prime Minister stays in power by turning his back on the United States. And yet we have a situation today where Joe Biden, a sitting president, is starting to turn his back on Israel because of the policies of Benjamin Netanyahu's government policies that are being carried out in direct defiance of American instructions to the contrary. So we live in unprecedented times, and it would seem to me that the United States has made it clear that their policy objectives, strategic policy objectives, and again, just a quick background, remember, part of the reason why we withdrew from Afghanistan in August of 2021 is that we were delinking ourselves from a two decade long commitment to the middle. We were going to lower our profile there as part of our pivot to the Pacific to confront China. And so we have, we no longer are actively implementing the Carter Era doctrine of guaranteed American military intervention. (06:21) Anytime something in the Middle East goes south that we don't like, we don't do Desert Storm anymore. We don't do Operation Iraqi freedom anymore. We don't do the invasion of Afghanistan anymore. We're not looking for a fight. We're looking to avoid a fight. And one of the reasons is that Iran has emerged as a very significant regional power with a tremendous amount of military capability. Iran is also a major player in the regional and global economy, and it's incumbent upon the United States to do what we can stabilize this economy to make sure that it doesn't go south, especially in an election year where the old James Carville mantra, it's the economy stupid factors in so large. So we don't want a war or a conflict with Iran that could lead to the shutting down of the straight or moves. This would've a devastating impact on global energy security. (07:20) Oil prices would go through the roof at a time again to remind people when Joe Biden has lowered the strategic petroleum reserve down to less than 17 days worth of reserves. So if there was suddenly a shutdown in oil transit, we'd be in trouble. Huge trouble in an election year, which is for Joe Biden. So it doesn't, what I'm trying to say is a long way of saying that there's a lot of reason to believe the reporting that's put out by Pepe Esquire. And again, when I say believe the reporting, I'm not challenging Pepe Escobar. I understand I'm saying that every journalist has sources and some sources are better than others. But what I'm saying is my assessment of the information that Pepe is reporting from the source would be that this is extraordinarily plausible, that it makes sense that this would indeed happen. Wilmer Leon (08:15): That was my takeaway, whether it was Bill Burns or whether it was Mr. Burns from whatever that cartoon is. I was really focused more on the point that there was a dialogue between the United States and the parties involved, and that those parties came to a consensus. In fact, when I read, it might have been, I guess it was Thursday, that Iran had seized an Iranian cargo ship in the Straits of Horus. Then there was the missile launching, and then that drones were used as the kind of foray or entree into all of this and that the drones traveled as far as they did. I said, oh, well, Iran was really sending a message more than they were an attack. And I think the message was, and is if you're looking for trouble, you found it and you found a very big bag of it, and you really don't want to mess around with this. It seems as though the Biden administration is starting to get that message. I don't know that Netanyahu, I think it seems like it's falling on deaf ears in Israel. Scott Ritter (09:45): What Iran did here is I have said that I've called it one of the most impressive military victories in modern history. Wilmer Leon (09:57): In fact, let me interrupt and say, folks, you need to read Scott's piece, the missiles of April. You can find it in Consortium News, Scott, you can tell me where else, but it's a phenomenal assessment of what recently transpired. Scott Ritter. Scott Ritter (10:14): Well, thank you very much. It was originally put out on my substack, it's scott ritter extra.com, but then Joe Luria, who I have a very good relationship, he's the editor of Consortium News, asked permission to publish it with Consortium News. And then he and I had a discussion and he asked some questions, follow on questions based upon the article, and I gave him some answers. (10:38) So he added some material. So for anybody who read my article on my substack, there's additional material in on the consortium news variant. You might want to read that as well. It's just basically an update when you write things about moving targets such as breaking news, you write based upon the data that's available. And in the time between, I published on my Substack and I spoke with Joe Lauria, there was additional information necessary that provided additional clarity to some of the points I made. So it's not that I changed anything in terms of my assessments, although that's possible too. When you get new information, assessments can change, they should change, and you shouldn't be afraid to change them. But my assessment regarding the Iranian, the efficacy of the Iranian attack remains the same, one of the most impressive military victories in time. Now, people say, well, wait a minute, how could that be? (11:29) They didn't blow up Israel. They didn't destroy anything. War is an extension of politics by other means. That's what everybody needs to understand. Military victories basically mean that you have achieved something through the use of military force. That's impressive, especially an impressive military victory. What Iran did on April 14th, on April 13th, 14th, and this attack is established deterrence, supremacy over Israel. Iran has had a problem with what I would say, making the world understand its declaratory policy regarding deterrence, it's deterrence strategy. Deterrence is basically a policy posture that says, if you want to hit me, understand that I'm going to come in afterwards and pummel you to death, that the price you're going to pay for hitting me is going to be so great that you don't want to hit me. I'm not threatening to hit you first. I'm sitting here saying, live and let live, but if you attack me, the price you're going to pay will be so overwhelming that it won't be worth what you thought you were going to achieve by hitting me in the first place. (12:44) Iran has established this deterrence superiority over the United States. We saw that when the United States assassinated QM Soleimani in 2020, the Iranians responded with a missile attack against the Alad airbase that didn't kill any Americans. It was telegraphed well in advance, but the purpose was to demonstrate the Americans that we can reach out and touch you anywhere, anytime with devastating force, and there's nothing you can do to stop this, nothing you can do. So now we get to William Burns meeting with his Iranian counterparts, and when they say, and we will strike American bases, burns is going, and they can, and if they do, there's nothing we could do to stop it and we will suffer horrific losses. Therefore, Mr. President, we should heed what the Iranians are saying. This is deterrent superiority over the United States, that the United States understands the consequences of attacking. Iran is not willing to live with those consequences. (13:45) They'll be severe even more so in an election year where any disruption of the economy is politically fatal to the incumbent seeking reelection. So they have successfully done that with the United States. Iran has also used missiles. Again, part of declaratory policy. It doesn't have to be necessarily spoken policy, but demonstrative, and we've seen Iran use missiles to strike targets in Iran, in Syria, Pakistan, in Pakistan. Wilmer Leon (14:17): In fact, on that Pakistan point, that was what about a month ago, maybe month and a half ago, and when I heard that Iran had sent, I think it was a cruise missile into Pakistan, I did my best to calculate how far that missile traveled. And then I checked, well, what's the distance between Tehran and Tel Aviv? It was about the same distance. And I said, I think Iran is sending a message to the Israel that we can strike Tel Aviv if we so choose. Scott Ritter (14:57): Yeah, I mean, first of all, just so people understand historically during the Gulf War, and not too many people know this, so Israel was very perturbed about Saddam Hussein's scud missiles hitting Israeli cities and locations, and they were threatening direct military intervention, which would've destroyed the coalition that George W. Bush had built up. And so we were doing everything we could to convince the Israelis that we had the scud problem under Control Pro. And you mean that you were personally involved in doing that? Yeah, no, this was my part of the war that, I mean, first of all, I wasn't a general, I wasn't a colonel. I wasn't lieutenant Colonel. I wasn't a major, I was just a captain. But as a captain, I played a bigger role than one would normally expect from a captain. I mean, when my name gets briefed to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff, and when General Schwarz cov not only fires me, but arrests me because of what I'm doing, I'm having an impact larger than what I was wearing on my shoulder, and I'm pretty proud of the work I did during the Gulf War, but that's beside the point. (16:04) The point is that Israel was being told, don't intervene because we've got it under control. But Israel needed to make a statement, and it was a statement being made not to Iraq, because what they did is they brought out a Jericho missile, which is a nuclear capable missile, but also can have control warheads, and they fired this missile into the Mediterranean Sea, and when you measure the distance that it went, it's exactly the distance from Israel to Baghdad and what the Israelis were telling, not the Iraqis, because the Iraqis couldn't monitor the attack and it wasn't publicly announced. They were telling the Americans who were monitoring that, if you don't solve this problem, we're going to solve it for you, and this is the weapon that we're going to use. And it was a wake up call. I remember when that happened. We're all like, stop. (16:55) We were only getting two hours sleep at night. No more sleep at night. Do everything you can to stop these Iraqi missiles from flying. We never did, but Israel stayed out of the war. But my point is, when you talk about, because to the lay person, they might be like, come on Wilmer, you're getting a little too creative. They're a little too conspiratorial. Wilmer Leon (17:17): I heard that. I heard that last Saturday night. I was at a buddy's house and he said to me, I walk into his house and CNN is on, as it always is, chirping in the background. And so finally he says to me, so what do you think? I said, think about what he said. What do you think about the Iraq? I said, oh. I said, man, that was collaborated. That was done with collaboration. He said, man, you always come in here with this junk. I said, well, okay. So I hear that a lot. Scott Ritter (17:53): Well, but in this case, it's not junk because I'm telling you, as somebody who has been in the technical analysis business of ballistic missiles for some time now, there are various ways to send a message. To give you an example, in the arms control world, sometimes the way to send a message is to open up telemetry channels that are normally closed down and launch a missile test. You're not saying anything. You don't put out a press release, but the people monitor because you don't want to say anything. North Korea does this all the time, all the time. They open up some telemetry channels and they just go, Hey, listen to this. And they send a to the Sea of Japan, and the technicians are going, ohoh. They got, oh, they did this capability. Oh, no. And then they're writing secret reports, and that message gets, meanwhile, the public is just sitting there, going to the beach, surfing, smoking dope, and doing whatever we do because we are not meant to get upset about this or worried about it. (18:52) It's a subtle message being sent to leadership through the intelligence agency. So your notion that the distance mattered because Iran didn't need to fire at that distance. They just could have fired at a closer range, whatever, but to fire at that distance is a signal to the people who are that distance away, that what we're doing here we can do here. But the problem is the Israelis weren't listening. This is the problem. Iran has through very indirect and direct means. First of all, Iran has never issued a public declaratory policy on deterrence and ballistic missiles until now. And it's one of the weaknesses of Iran is that they didn't make it clear what the consequences would be. The United States got it because they hit us and we're smart enough to go, oh, we don't want that again. Pakistan sort of gets it, but I mean ISIS and Syria, when they got hit with missiles, ISIS isn't going to sit there and go, oh, you're going to hit us with missiles, so we're not going to carry out terrorism anymore. (20:03) No, that was a punitive attack. The same thing with the various missile strikes in Iraq. It was punitive attack. It wasn't meant to be a declaratory policy statement. And so here you have a situation where Israel just isn't getting it because Israel believes that it has deterrent supremacy over Iran. And why would Israel believe that? I don't know. Maybe they've assassinated a whole bunch of Iranian scientists in Iran with no consequence. Maybe they've carried out covert direct action sabotage in Iran blowing up nuclear related facilities with no consequence. Maybe they've struck Iranian revolutionary Guard command positions in Lebanon, in Syria, in Iraq, inflicting casualties with no consequence. So maybe Israel believed that it had established deterrent supremacy over Iran. Therefore, when they saw a meeting at the Iranian consulate in Damascus of these major people plotting the next phase of the operation against Israel, they said, take it out. (21:04) There won't be any consequence because the Iranians are afraid of us. The Iranians won't strike us because we have deterrent supremacy. Iran believes that if they attack us, we will come down on them tenfold. And so they struck the consulate and Iran went, guess what guys? Nope, it's over. We're done with the subtlety. We warned you don't attack our sovereign territory. The consulate is sovereign territory. We're going to respond. But now the problem with the Iranian response is you have to put yourself in the Iranian shoes because the last thing Iran wants, it's just like the United States. They don't want a war with Israel. They don't want it, as they said in the Godfather, it's bad for business, it's bad for business. And business right now for Iran is improving. They're members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. China has brokered a reproachment with Saudi Arabia, dismantling an American strategy of creating a Sunni shield against the Shia crescent and provoking permanent conflict that would empower American defense industry, Israeli security credibility and economic co prosperity between that part of the ward and Europe with Israel in the middle. (22:25) Israel's going, wow, we're back in the game, guys, when Israel was Benjamin Netanyahu, for all the criticism that people have out there, and I'm one of those biggest critics understand that on October 6th, he was on top of the world on October 6th, he had created a geopolitical reality that had Israel normalizing relations with the Gulf Arab states, Israel becoming a major player in a major global economic enterprise, the India, middle East, economic C and the world, not talking about a Palestinian state anymore. Israel was entering, becoming legitimate. It was like Michael Corleone and the Godfather when he was saying, I'm going to put all that behind me and I'm going to become legitimate, reached out and just drag them back in by October 7th. And then Israel was exposed for the criminal enterprise that it is, and now Israel has collapsed. But Iran, that was the Israeli process. (23:27) Iran is sitting here saying, we don't want to war. We're members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. We normalized relations with Saudi Arabia. We have an axis of resistance that's holding Israel in check and these plans, Hezbollah is very strong. The militias in Iraq and are strong. The Anella movement in Yemen, the Yemen strong, but we don't want to provoke war. What we want is to become economically viable again. The promise that we, the theocracy have made to the Iranian people over time that trust us, things will get better. We're in that, Hey, you trusted us. Now things are about to get better. We're joining bricks together with Saudi Arabia, so we're going to work with Saudi Arabia and these powerful economic interests that no longer are turning their backs on us to create economic opportunity. And the last thing Iran needed is a war with Israel. It's bad for business. (24:29) It's bad for business. And so now the Iranians are like, how do we set declaratory policy to achieve deterrent supremacy? I mean, not supremacy, superiority supremacy is where you have everybody just totally intimidated. Superiority is where you put the thought in people's mind, and they now need to tell the Israelis, you can't attack us or the price you're going to pay is tenfold. Normally you do that. It's like going in the boxing ring. Mike Tyson, even now, I don't know if you've been watching his training videos of him getting ready for this fight he's got in July 20th. The man's a beast. I'm intimidated if I could 57, what he's doing. Wilmer Leon (25:10): Well, lemme tell you. I don't know if you saw the report of the guy that was kicking the back of his seat on the airplane, and he came over. He kept asking the guy, Hey man, can you stop kicking my seat? And the guy wouldn't leave him alone. And the folks on the plane said, finally he came over the top of that seat like Iran and pummeled the guy. They had to carry the guy off the plane and a stretcher. Scott Ritter (25:42): Well see, that's deterrence supremacy. There you go. Deterrence supremacy is when I jump into the ring with Tyson and Tyson knocks my face in, kicks my teeth out, and I'm on the ground hospitalized and bites your ear, pardon? And bites your ear. That is a bonus. Yes. (26:02) The deterrence superiority is where I jump in the ring, ent Tyson comes up, takes the fist right to my nose and just touches it. But he doesn't in a way that I'm in my stance, but he's already there and I'm like, oh, oh, I got a problem. Yeah, okay. I don't really want to be in this ring, Mike. It was a misunderstanding. I'm backing off. I'm just going to go out here and pee my pants in the parking lot. So that's what Iran needed to do. But how do you do this? It's very delicate operation. That's why this was one of the most impressive military opera victories in modern history because what Iran did was make all the demonstration necessary to show potential, and in the end, they hit a base nem. And this is important for your audience to understand. The Naam airbase is the single most heavily protected spot on earth when it comes to anti-ballistic missile defense. (26:55) There's no spot on earth that's better defended than nem. It has at the heart of this defense, a and I'll give you a fancy name, a N TP Y two X-Band radar sounds like, well, not one, not one, but two. Well, it's the number two radar, not two radars. Wilmer Leon (27:13): No, I'm saying because I got one over my house. Yeah, they got two over 2.0. This is 2.0 man. Scott Ritter (27:20): They got this radar there that has the ability to do overheard the horizon surveillance, but it's not just the radar, which is the most sophisticated radar of its type in the world. It's linked into the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization in the United States Strategic Command and the satellites that we have over hanging over the area. So all of that's linked in into a common command center that's shared with the Israelis. So this data is fed to the Israelis and around Nati. (27:48) And why is Naam important? I don't know. The F 35 I fighters are there. This is Israel's best fighter plane, their strategic deterrent. They have F fifteens, F sixteens, and they do other secret things there as well because of the notice that they were given, if I understand it, they were able to move those F 35. So the F, again, it was coordinated 100%. I mean, we'll get to that in a second. But they have the arrow two and arrow three missiles, which are joint Israeli American projects are deployed around Nevada. David Sling, which is another anti-ballistic missile capability, is deployed around Nevada. Advanced Patriot missiles are deployed around Nevada. And the US Thad system is deployed around Nevada. The bottom line is they have, and there's Iron Dome as well. So what they have is this multi-layered defense using the world's best anti-ballistic missile technology linked to the world's best surveillance and tracking technology. (28:56) And you read the literature on this stuff, we hit a bullet with a bullet. Okay, wow, you guys are good. Now here's the other thing. It's all specifically tailored for one threat and one threat only. Iranian medium range ballistic missiles. That's all it's geared to do. It's not like there's confusion. It's not like you have a multitude of missions. One mission, Iranian medium range missiles. Okay? So now that's like me watching Mike Tyson training videos, and I'm watching the training and I'm like, I got 'em. I can move. I got this guys, I got this. I go into training, bullet, hit a bullet, hit a bullet. I got this. And so now, Mike Tyson, Iran, they go a step further. Not only do they do the Pepe Escobar advanced notice, they build the attack in a way that says, Hey, this is really happening. They announce that the launch of the drones, and these aren't just any drones, guys. (29:57) These are slow, moving, loud drones. So you couldn't get a better air alarm system than what Iran gave Israel. They unleashed the drones, and here the drones go. Now Israel's got, they're like flying bumblebees six hours of advanced notice, which gives the United States time to say, take your F 30 fives out, anything value out. But the other thing the Iranians did is they told the United States, see, I think they went a step further. The Iranians made it clear that they will only strike military targets that were related to the action. Iran's whole argument. And again, I know in the West, we tend to rule our eyes, like when Russia says, we acted in Ukraine based upon Article 51, self-defense, preemptive self-defense, the Caroline Doctrine, all the people who hate Russia go, no, no. That was a brutal roar of aggression. Unprovoked. No, the Russians actually have a cognitive legal case because that's how Russia operates based upon the rule of law. (30:57) Now, the rule of law, Wil, as we all know, can be bent, twisted, manipulated. I'm not saying that the Russians have the perfect case. What I'm saying is the case that Russia has made is cognizable under law, right? It's defendable. You could take it to a court and it's not going to be tossed out asr. It's not Tony Blinken rules based order. It is not. And so now the Saudis, or not the, I'm sorry, the Iranians, they have been attacked and they have cited Article 51 of the UN charter as their justification. But now you can't claim to be hiding behind the law and then just totally break the law yourself. If Iran had come in, you can. You're the United States, correct? But that's the rules based international, not the law based international. That's the difference between the two. The rules say we can do whatever we want. (31:50) The law says no, you're constrained by the law. So in order to justify self-defense, Iran had to limit its retaliation to the immediate threat that was posed by those who attacked them, which means you can hit the two air bases where the airplanes flew out. And there's a third site that nobody's talking about yet. Is that the CIA site? Well, it's the 8,200, the Sgin site on Golan Heights that's looking out into Damascus. And according to the Iranians, that's the site that gathered the intelligence about the Iranians being in the consulate and then shared that intelligence with the airplanes coming in. And so these three targets are the three. Now, in addition to that, Iran is allowed to strike facilities and locations that are involved in the defense of these three things. So the ballistic missile defense capability becomes a legitimate target. But now, so Iran has to hit these three, and so they've broadcasted, we're coming, we're coming. (32:55) And that gives the United States do something politically smart, which is to tell the Israelis, we will defend you, but we will not participate in any Israeli counter attack. So we've limited the scope and scale of our participation in this. And so we came together, we started shooting down these drones, creating a fiction of Iranian incompetence, Iranian lack of capability. So this is part of the plan. This is all part of the plan. Now, Iran didn't sit down with the United States and say, this is what we're going to do. This is what we want you to do. Iran is scripting it for them. I mean, this is basically United States going, damn, I forgot my lines. Here you go. Here come the drones. Here come the drones. Shoot them down. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Thank you. And so we're shooting it down, and then we're sending the cruise missiles, just in case you don't know, we're launching them live on TV Here. (33:51) Let me show you a closeup of what they look like so you understand the operational parameters of the system. And off go, the cruise missiles. Don't shoot pigeons, shoot cruise missiles. So now they're shooting. But then as they're doing this, the Iranians are sitting there going, okay, so we sent the drones. What's lightening up, guys? First of all, what people don't understand is before all this happened, the Iranians did a very targeted cyber attack and shut down. They attacked the Iron Dome system. Now, why do you want to attack the Iron Dome system but not attack the others? Because the Iron Dome system isn't designed to take down big ballistic missiles. It's designed to take down the other stuff. Medium range cruise missiles. No, well, cruise missiles and drones, low flying. It's actually designed to take down kaka rockets and the Hamas rockets. Okay? That's what it's supposed to do. (34:44) So you disrupt this so that the other systems have to take priority, and then the arrives, you go, oh, thank you very much. Now, some of the drones that were sent in aren't armed with explosives, but armed with radars and signals intelligence collection, which they're broadcasting the data back to Iran. These are guys are very sophisticated ladies and gentlemen. These aren't amateurs you're dealing with. And so they're sitting in going here. They come turn it on, collect, thank you. And now they have their targeters looking at a big map going, okay, we got a radar here. We got here. Okay, now they're shooting. Okay, we got missile launchers here, boom, boom, boom. It's all there. And they've looked at all. Then they say, okay, remember, because the goal now is to get the glove to touch the nose. The goal isn't to hit the knockout. (35:33) So they say, what do we need to do to demonstrate capability the Iranians used? Now, there's some mixed reporting out here. The problem is I like everybody else, I'm held hostage with the Iranians. I don't get to go on the ground anymore and look at the debris and do technical analysis. I used to do that, and I used to be able to come back. One of the things we did with the Iraqis, just so people understand, I am not the dumbest marine in the world. I'm one of the dumbest Marines in the world, but I do have some capability based upon experience. And when my time as a weapons inspector, I worked with the Israelis, their technical intelligence people on looking at debris of the missiles that Iraq fired against Israel. And we were able to ascertain several different variants of scud missiles that have different capabilities that the Iraqis had been denying or not declaring. (36:27) And by coming back to them with the technical intelligence from the debris on the ground, the Iraqis had to admit to certain capabilities that they had been denying. And this is important when you're trying to be able to stand before the world and say, we understand the total picture of Iraqi ballistic missile capability, and we can certify that we can account for it all. Because imagine going before the security council and saying that only to have the Israelis go, yes, but what about variant 3D alpha four? Well, I don't understand what you're talking about. What's 3D alpha four? That's the point. You're making a report and you don't understand what we're talking about, which means you don't know everything, do you? I don't like to be in that position as an expert, or I want to know everything. And so we did, and we got the Iraqis to come clean. (37:14) So when I say we could account for Iraq's ballistic missile program, we could account for every aspect of it. So I don't get to do that right now. So I'm at a disadvantage where I have to rely upon information. So I don't know if Iran used their hypersonic missiles or not. I don't know that, okay, reports, it's reported. There's reports that they did, and then there's reports that they didn't, and it's conflicting. The most recent press TV report and press TV is a organ of the Iranian state, says that they did use the fat two missiles against thetan airfield. So I'm going to run with that, but I want to put a big caveat on that, that I don't know for certain. (38:01) But we do know, just looking at the characteristics of the missiles that came in, that they used at least three different kinds of, they used more than that, but three that were designed to put the glove on the nose, other missiles that were sent were designed to be shot down again as part of the intelligence collection process. So you send in an older ballistic missile that comes on a ballistic missile trajectory. The first thing that you do by doing that is you are training the defense systems. These Iranians are smart. They understand these things. You're training them because you see, there's a whole bunch of computers, software, artificial intelligence. This is the proof that ai, please don't do it better than ai. Is the brain a train brain? Because ai, listen to what everybody's talking about. I mean, I get this phone call. I don't know if you get this up, Scott, I'd like to take the transcripts of your discussions and use them to train my ai. I don't know if you've ever received that request. And I'm like, no, I don't want you to do that. But I just personally go. But the point is, that's how ai, it's not artificial intelligence, ladies and gentlemen. It's just programmed, just programmed in a different way. And you can program in stupidity, which the Iranians said, which they usually do. Let's program in stupidity. Wilmer Leon (39:24): Well, for example, just for a quick example, that's why facial recognition technology fails to the degree that it does. It's limited by the abilities and capabilities of the people that are programming it. That's why facial recognition technology doesn't work on Asian people, and it doesn't work on people of color. Dammit, I'm the wrong race. I could have put that a long time ago. Go ahead, Scott Ritter (39:57): Touche. So the Iranians are programming the ai. They're sending missiles in, and the system is starting to normalize to come up with a, because it's wartime now. So now you're actually detecting tracking and firing. Then what you do is you throw in, it's like a pitcher, fastball, fastball, fastball, changeup, and here comes the changeup. First changeup they do is, and I don't know the sequence that they did this, but we see the video evidence. There's a warhead that comes in, and again, it's about timing. So you're sending these missiles in. Now they have separating warheads. So what happens when a missile has a separating warhead is the radar's picking one target. (40:44) All of a sudden, the radar is dealing with two targets, but it's not just two targets. When you separate the warhead from the missile body, the missile body starts to tumble and it starts sending differentiating signals, and it's no longer a ballistic trajectory. So the computer's going, oh my God, what's happening here? Meanwhile, this warhead's going this way, it's tracking that, and it has to make a decision. Which one? Which one? Which one, which one, which one? This one, pick this warhead. So now they've trained it to discriminate onto this warhead, which is what they want. Now, you'd say, why would they want to look at that warhead? You'll find out the warhead comes in and they're timing. It's like a track coach got the timer, warhead comes in, and the missiles fire up to hit it, and you go, we got it. We now know what the release point is for the missiles being fired. (41:29) So now they send in this other missile, it comes in, warhead separates the AI says, go with the warhead baby. They ignore this thing, which is good. It's just a distraction. They're focused on the warhead, they're on the clock. Everything's getting queued up just the way it's supposed to be. Everything's optimized. We're going to take this thing, a bullet hits a bullet baby, and all of a sudden, the warhead right before the launch on the ground, fires off a whole bunch of decoys. It's like a shotgun shell. And the computer goes, damn, what the hell just happened? We don't know. It's going crazy, trying to differentiate between all this stuff. And they're firing a whole bunch of missiles now in panic overload, and they're trying to deal with this. And meanwhile, they have a warhead here. They accelerated these shotgun shells out. So they're going faster. (42:17) Now, the computer's adapting to that. Oh God, what do we do? Fire, fire, fire. That warhead's hanging back. It's not the priority right now. And then once everything's committed, you see it on the film, boom. It has a booster engine on it. It gets fired through the chaff. Nothing's intercepting it, bam hits the ground. But not only that, as it comes in, it makes an adjustment. I don't know if people saw that. It comes in and you see it go up, up. Again, terminal adjustment to hit the precise target it wanted to hit. Iran sent a couple of those in, and they took out the Iron Dome sites, et cetera. A signal just got you. And they know that the Israelis are smart. They know that there's a bunch of Israeli guys who were smarter than I am that I used to work with who were looking at all this stuff going, oh God, they got us. (43:11) They got us. Damn. Now we come to Nevada, and it's the same thing. They send in the missiles. This is the most heavily layered system in the world. They send in the missiles, and this one's not even as sophisticated. It just comes in. They release it, hyper accelerates down. Then wham hits the ground and the Israelis, because the Israelis are like, okay, we got it. We got it. We don't have it. It's like a catcher used to catch 70 mile an hour fastballs, and it hits him in the head, and then the guy fires the 102 mile an hour. Bam. What happened? I wasn't ready for that. It comes in and it hits it. Wilmer Leon (43:47): Well catcher called a change up, and a fastball came through. Fast ball came in. Scott Ritter (43:52): So then they came into Na, Nevada, and they touched Naum at least five times. The Iranians were saying seven times. I would probably go with five. And the reason why I say this is that there is a chance the most heavily defended space on earth, there's a chance that they got two of 'em. I'm going to concede that point to the Israelis and the Americans that you put all these hundreds of billions of dollars into building something, and you got two out of seven, but five hit. But the idea, none of them were meant to be a knockout blow. Each one was just a, Hey, hey. And the Israelis know that They're sitting there going, and now they've come to the realization, and this is the whole point. After all of this, the Israelis have come to the realization that Iran can reach out and touch us anytime it wants to, any place it wants to, and there's nothing we can do to stop them. So now the Israelis are in a quandary because Iran has war is an extension of politics by other means. (44:51) So Iran has established a political reality using military means to establish a deterrence superiority without creating the conditions that mandate an automatic Israeli response. You see, they've allowed the situation a narrative to be developed by the United States and Israel that says, Iran sucks. He sent everything in there. We shot it all down. We're better than they are. We actually established deterrence over Iran by telling the Iranians that no matter what they do, you thought you were Mike Tyson. You came in and swang gave us all your punches. You miss, you, miss you, miss you, miss you, miss. It's like, Ali, I'm still here. You didn't touch me. You punched yourself out. Can't touch this. That's the narrative that Iran was allowing the West to do. But the reality though is that the Israelis got down there, and there was an interesting text, I don't know if you saw it by, not text, but a post by an Israeli insider who has connectivity with the war council. (45:58) And he said, if the Israeli public heard what was being said in the War Council, 4 million people will be leaving Israel right now. I'm going to tell you right now what was said in the war Council, Iran can destroy us. Iran can flatten us. There's nothing we can do if we allow this to happen to remain unanswered. We've lost everything that we've fought for over the past several decades. This deterrence, supremacy that we thought we had has gone forever. Nobody will ever respect us. Nobody will ever fear us, and therefore people will attack us, and we will be in an untenable situation Wilmer Leon (46:39): Wait a minute. That's that's very important politically, because that is part of the whole Zionist ideology, is we we're the persecuted people, and you all need us to protect you because the wolves are always at the door. And now what is the reality is all that insurance money you've been paying for those insurance policies, you've wasted your money. Scott Ritter (47:15): Absolutely. I used to live in Turkey, and when I've traveled through the planes of Turkey, they have shepherds with their flocks, and out there amongst the flocks are the sheep dogs. I don't know if you've ever seen a picture of an Anatolian sheep dog. Yes, big. Wilmer Leon (47:34): I'm a big dog guy. Yes. Scott Ritter (47:35): Okay, so these are like bears, right? Some of them are bigger than bears. And I remember we were walking once in a Kurdish village and we got too close to the sheep, and all of a sudden, these two things coming at us, and they're bigger than we are. I mean, these are bigger than humans, and they're coming at us, and they're going to kill us. And we knew that it was just all over. Then you hear, and the shepherd gives whatever signal, and the sheep dogs stop, and then they come up and they sit down and you pet 'em. (48:04) They have no ears because their ears have been chewed off. Their noses are scars their faces. They got these giant collars with spikes on to protect their throat, their faces like that, because they fight wolves. They hold the wolves off. Israel has been telling the world that we are the anatolian sheep dog. We are here and we will protect you. The rest of the world, the sheep from the wolves, they're getting ready. What Iran just did is went, took off the cloak, then went, you're just a sheep. You're just a sheep. We are the wolves. You're just a sheep. And the sheep's going, I don't want everybody to know this. We were faking them out, that we were the anatolian sheep dog, but we're really just a sheep. So that's a political problem for the Israelis, and this is important, and this is probably the most important part of this discussion, believe it or not, this isn't about Israeli security. This isn't about a real threat to, because Iran is a responsible nation. When Iran talks about deterrence, Wilmer Leon (49:07): oh, wait a minute now, wait a minute. Now, Scott, now you've crossed the Rubicon is Iran is responsible? Yeah, Iran is a, they're ravaging. Crazy. Raghead. Come on, Scott. Scott Ritter (49:25): That may be true, but they're ravaging, crazy Raghead who operate based upon a law-based system as opposed to a rule-based system. Not only that, a law-based system that is based on thousands of years of history and culture, right? I mean, that's their own national culture. I mean, a lot of people go the theocracy, the theocracy, theocracy, yes, but Persian. Persian, Persian. I understand that this is a civilized people who have been around. They invented cataract surgery. They invented a lot of stuff. They invented the agrarian watering system, the irrigation, the irrigation system. They invented the wheel. I think they probably did. (50:20) We've been reinventing the wheel over time. But mathematics, psychology, the whole thing, sociology, all comes out of there. And today, you see it when you Google International Math Olympics, the teams that are coming in at top are Chinese teams and Iranian teams, MIT, California technology, they're coming in down at the bottom. They're not one in this thing behind it. The Indian Institute of Technology, the Indians are getting up there too. They have good applied science and good applied skills. And it's not just that. I mean, to give you an example, the Iranians have the highest percentage of peer reviewed, not percentage, the highest number of peer reviewed PhD thesis published per year. So it's not like, excuse me, Iraq, I, forgive me for this, but under Sadam Hussein, where you went to an Iraqi university, it used to have a good reputation, but they were just punching out, handing out diplomas to Kuai. (51:26) And the thugs who went in there and said, I went to school. Here's your diploma. See, I'm a doctor. No, in Iran, you earn it. You go to the school, you earn it, and you earn it the old fashioned way, peer reviewed, which means your thesis leaves. Iran goes out of ranks the world, the experts, they review it, they come back and they say, this is PhD level work. Wilmer Leon (51:46): I just had a conversation with another dear friend. And when you look at their diplomats, when you look at their leadership, many of them are engineers. President Amad, the first time I went to Iran, I got to sit for two hours with then former president Amadinijad has a PhD in engineering and teaches engineering at the University of Tehran. I sat there for two hours listening to this cat going, oh my God. Yeah, he's not what? (52:22) He was sold deep. He's not some short madman. He's a short, brilliant man. Scott Ritter (52:31): A brilliant madman maybe. But the point is, brilliant dude, genius. No, they're all that way. They all have extraordinary. First of all, let's stop picking on Ayatollahs. If people understood what it took to become an ayatollah in Iran, the level of seminarian study, what you have to know, not just about. And here's the important thing about the Shia theocracy for all the Shia people out there, if I got this wrong, please forgive me, but it's my understanding, especially in the Iranian model, they have something called the Marja, which is basically, it's like your flock. (53:14) What do they call it? A diocese in the Catholic church, right? Congregation. Thank you. There's what we want, congregation. It's a congregation. Now, you have to, because in Iran, it's not just about knowing the religion, but having a philosophy that is derived from absolute understanding of the religion that is approachable to the people. It is religious democracy, because now I've done my ayatollah training and they go, Huma, I can't do the cross. Sorry, God, I just made a huge mistake. Forgive me. But they anoint you. They say, you're the dude. You're the guy that can do it. But now, to survive, you have to write a document that says, this is my religious philosophy as it applies to something today. There's a name for that, the, or something. Again, I apologize, but they put that out there. Now. People read it, the public, it's there for the public. (54:10) And then people go, I like this guy. I'm going to hang out at his marja for a little bit and see what he does. Now, if they come to the Marja and he's not impressive, then the Marja dissipates and they shut 'em down. They say, you failed. You couldn't win the people. It's not just about imposing religion on people. It's about getting the people to buy into what you're saying religiously. Wilmer Leon (54:35): That's what the Ayatollah Khomeini was doing when he was in exile in France. Scott Ritter (54:39): Bingo. Okay. But you have compete, for instance, Al Sistani in Iraq, he has a competing the Najaf. Marges compete with the coal Marges that compete with Carval, which compete with, there's competing margins. And even within Comb, there's different margins. Wilmer Leon (54:59): I'm drawing a blank on the guy in Iraq that was raising all kind of hell. Muqtada al Sadr. There you go. Yeah. Who is the son, if I have it right? He's the son of a the, Grand Ayatollah Scott Ritter (55:17): yeah, yeah, yeah. And he, in order to become credible, had to go to Cole and study and learn things because everybody, when he was out there talking, he had a lot of personality. He had the name, but people are going, you don't have the credentials, man. You can't sit here and play religion because we take our religion seriously. So we had to go disappear and go to calm and train up and all that. Wilmer Leon (55:45): Had to coach him up a little bit. Scott Ritter (55:48): But he also then has to go out and sell himself right? To an audience. And a lot of people weren't buying what he was selling. I mean, he's a very popular man, very influential in Iraqi politics today. But it's earned. It's not given. But the point is, the Iranians are a responsible nation, and if Israel was smart, they would've said, okay, we're in a bad position here, bad position. (56:12) It's not a good position for us to be in. We need to take a step back, take advantage of the fact that the Iranians have written a script that makes it believable that we did some amazing stuff. And then we have to reassess where we are. What do we have to do to get our defenses back up? What do we have to do to get capabilities to strike Iran? When do we want to do it? Because the United States isn't on our side right now, behavioral modification to get the world to love us. Again, things of this nature, strategic thinking. But Israel's governed by a crazy man named Benjamin Netanyahu, who doesn't care about Israel. He doesn't care about the Israeli people. He doesn't care about Israeli security. He doesn't care about alliances with the United States. He's a 76-year-old man in bad health who only cares about Benjamin Netanyahu. (56:58) And he right now has his butt in a sling because he got embarrassed on October 7th, and now he was just humiliated by the Iranians. And he can only stay in power as a wartime prime minister. And if they're going to either, they have to ratchet it up in Gaza. Every Israeli knows that they lost in Gaza that they haven't won Harts the day before, the Iranian attack front page headline, we lost. We lost everything. We haven't won anything we've lost. And that's the assessment of the Israeli intelligence service. And people who don't know need to know that Harts is a very prominent Israeli newspaper with a very good reputation of like, well, you said good reputation. I was about to compare to the New York, used to have, right? There you go. There you go. Like it used to have. But so he's lost in Gaza. (57:52) He was looking to maybe promote a conflict against Hezbollah to expand the war. And there's always that hope that we can drag the United States into a larger war with Iran. But the United States, it says, no, we're not doing that. Hezbollah now is linked to Iranian deterrence, superiority. So you can't do the Hezbollah thing like you wanted to do anymore. You're in a, and now you've got Ansara Allah in the Red Sea shutting down the Red Sea, shutting down the Israeli economy. Wilmer Leon (58:22): And on the other side, you have Iran shutting down the strai of Harmouz. And that's why I go back to that ship that they captured because they wanted the United States to understand will shut your oil off. Scott Ritter (58:36): And the United States, remember, we've been running guardian prosperity or something like that, whatever the name of our wonderfully named operation to deter the Hootie. And we, I don't know if everybody understands, we had to approach the Hoothie last week and beg them to stop it. Please, please, please, please, please. We'll stop bombing you. We'll do everything. We'll lift the terrorism thing, but just stop this, please, because we can't force you to stop it. And the Hootie went, no. Yeah. They said, here's another one. The missiles, you guys are deterring. That's a failure. But that's the thing. The failure of deterrents policy has been played out with the Hoothie and it's being played out. See, America no longer has deterrents, superiority. We no longer have deterrence. We can't deter a minute. Wilmer Leon (59:25): Wait a minute. We sent the Eisenhower into, now this takes me back to, so we sent a couple of aircraft carrier groups into the region when I think it was the Eisenhower. Oh, it was Gerald Ford. We first sent the Gerald Ford in President Putin says to Joe Biden, why did you do that? You are not scaring anybody. These people don't scare. And oh, by the way, we can sink your carrier from here with our Kenjal missile. Hypersonic missile. So stop it, Joe. You're not scaring anybody. Scott Ritter (01:00:08): But here's something else that happened, and I'm glad you brought this up. This is an important thing. The United States linked at least two of its ships to this system, and this is part of the American anti-ballistic missile strategy. We do this with Japan, we do this with Korea, we do this with Europe. We have a whole bunch of ages, class destroyers in Spain that we now are going to fan out to protect Europe from Russian missiles. And we're telling everybody, no worry. We got this. We got this. Remember guys, when that satellite was coming down, we shot it down. We're that good? We can pull it, hit a bullet kind of stuff. So we went to the Israelis and we plugged in to the world's most sophisticated anti-ballistic missile shield in the world. We plugged in and the Iranians went. (01:00:55) What the Iranians proved, and I just want this to sink in there, they can hit any American ship anytime they want with a warhead that will sink that ship. They just sent a signal to the United States that we will sink every one of your aircraft carriers. We will sink every one of your destroyers, all these wonderful ships you have. You can't stop it. The missile we sent in and touched, Nevada can sink any one of your ships. And how do we know? Because you plugged your ships into the system. Guys, up until then, we might've been theoretical about this, but now you plugged it in and you were playing the game. You committed your best anti-missile ships to the defense system, and you didn't stop us. We went in and went pop, pop, pop, pop, pop five times on the target. If Nevada had become the Gerald Ford or become the Eisenhower or the Carl Benson, we would've sunk that ship. (01:01:52) That's the other thing that the Iranians did here that nobody's talking about, because this is the scariest thing in the world to the United States. Iran just told the United States, your Navy is useless. Useless. It's done and now, but it's not just the Iranians, the North Korean, China China has everybody out there who has hypersonic missile capability is now basically saying, oh yeah, we can sink American ships too. And this is important thing. Wilmer Leon (01:02:22): I was talking to KJ Noh last week, and KJ was talking about the United States sending all kind of hardware into Taiwan and that the United States may even wind up sending personnel in Taiwan and in anticipation of China making a, I think this is what KJ said, making a land invasion in Taiwan. And I said, kj, why would China do that when all they got to do is sink an aircraft carrier with a hypersonic missile? And he said, well, that's a good point. Scott Ritter (01:02:58): No, I mean the United States, but now we come to, because America's facing the same problem that BB Netanyahu is, except there's not a political dimension to it. BB Netanyahu right now has to do something to stay in power politically so now Wilmer Leon (01:03:15): and not be prosecuted for theft. Scott Ritter (01:03:19): Correct. For his corruption. Yeah. Second, he leaves office, he gets arrested and he gets put on trial. Wilmer Leon (01:03:25): Ala Donald Trump. Scott Ritter (01:03:27): Except, yeah, I mean, yeah, Wilmer Leon (01:03:32): that's a whole nother story. But I'm just saying that right now is what Donald Trump is facing. Scott Ritter (01:03:38): Correct. Wilmer Leon (01:03:38): And I'm not saying it's legitimate or not legitimate. Scott Ritter (01:03:41): Yeah. That's my only reason why I did that is I don't want to get into the, no, Wilmer Leon (01:03:47): it's happening. Scott Ritter (01:03:47): Because Netanyahu is a criminal. He is a corrupt person. Donald Trump is an imperfect human being who may have committed some crimes, but in America, you're innocent until proven guilty. And he has these trials, many of which people believe are politicized, designed, and diminishes. We can move on. We don't need to go down that rabbit hole on this episode. But the fact is Israel right now is desperately looking for a face saving way out of this because the fiction of we were so good that we stopped this Iranian attack is not believable. It's not believable domestically. So now the Israelis are looking for the ability to do something that if not gives them deterrence, superiority they're looking for right now, deterrence, parody. Parody. And so here's the question, because you remember now we come back to Pepe, and this is probably a good way to spin this around. (01:04:53) William Burns met with Iranians beforehand and came up with an elegant solution to an extraordinarily difficult and dangerous problem. Iran now has established a deterrence philosophy, and they articulate the second Israeli airplanes take off. We launch our missiles. We're not waiting for Israel to attack us. The second your planes take off, we're firing. And Iran has said, we consider the matter settled. Settled. We consider the matter over. You struck us, we struck back, let it go. Correct. But it's not settled because there's thing called politics. And Iranians, again, are some of the most sophisticated political players in the world. So my guess is as we're speaking, Hey Pepe, if you're out there, call your source. I'm giving you a hint that behavioral patterns, one thing I used to do as an intelligence officer is do analysis and assessments, predictive analysis based upon behavioral patterns. Humans tend to repeat behavioral patterns. (01:05:59) And so now the CIA and the Iranians have talked to prevent one crisis. They're talking right now and the CIA saying, guys, what can we do to prevent Israel from doing something really stupid, which is the big attack, which politically we need a safety valve. This is the equivalent of a methane tank getting heat on it. And if you don't have a safety valve that goes, it's going to blow. So how do we get a safety valve? What can Israel do to save face that doesn't impact you? And you see the Israelis now ratcheting it down. It was, we're going to strike nuclear facilities. We're going to strike this, we're going to strike that. And now they're saying, well, what if we strike something outside of Iran? But it's clearly Iran like at seven 11. Yeah, at three in the morning when it's been closed and nobody's there strike at seven 11. (01:06:53) And so they're desperately looking for this outlet. The question now is, what will Iran do? My bet is that Iran will facilitate a face saving gesture by Israel because the Iranians don't want and don't need a war, a major war business. Well, it's horribly. The Iranian foreign ministry, just so everybody understands this, their number one priority now, one of their top priorities is they have all of their smart people right now writing papers for the Brick summit in October, which Iran will be attending and will be playing a major role in establishing new global infrastructure and institutions on how the world's going to be governed and a possible international currency off of the dollar bingo. These are big ticket things. Business. They don't need to be business. They don't need to be dragged into this stupidity of a mafia family dispute Wilmer Leon (01:07:54): Really quickly. One of the reasons why President Putin went into Ukraine light in the beginning was he doesn't want a war because it's bad for his economy. Scott Ritter (01:08:11): But the West didn't pick up on that. Now we got thing. Wilmer Leon (01:08:15): And now he's kicking ass and taking names and folks are all befuddled. Hey, you started. You went looking for trouble. You found a big bag of it. And now, so thank you for your time, Scott. Two things I want to hit quickly. One is the estimates are in very simple terms, that Iran spent a million dollars on this attack and Israel lost a billion in their response to it. Scott Ritter (01:08:50): I'd say 60 million for the Iranians, about 3.2 billion for the Israelis and the United States altogether. Wilmer Leon (01:08:55): Okay. Okay. And this other thing, is it velvet or violet, this AI program that Israel has developed that they assign a score? Are you familiar with this? They assign a score to Palestinians based upon a number of predetermined social behaviors. And when your score gets close to a hundred, you get assassinated. And this is all generated by artificial intelligence. You mentioned ai, so I want to just to quickly drop that one in there before we get out. Scott Ritter (01:09:31): No, I mean, again, it's a criminal enterprise. It's about killing innocence. And part of this AI too is that it calculates the number of civilian casualties that'll be assigned to that thing target. And unfortunately for the Palestinians, one would think if you're a rational, look, I keep telling people, I'm not a pacifist, and if you want to go to war, I'm old. You're the guy. But guys, I have no problem killing you. I mean, I know you're trying to kill me, so I will kill you, and I'm not going to weep at night when you die because you wanted to play this game. But I'm not in the business of killing you and taking out innocent civilians. Okay? (01:10:17) That's where I draw the line. Now there's collateral damage. If it happens, I'll be upset, but I have my parameters. If I'm going to take you and they're saying, you're going to take out this many civilians, I'm going, that's a bad target. Not the right time. Not the right place. We're not going to do it. But the Israelis have the opposite thing. It's not just when you're going to take out the target, but when you get the maximum impact of civilian casualties. The Israeli approach is AI program is designed to kill the maximum number of family members and civilians to maximize the impact of the attack on the morale of the Palestinian people. But see, that's where AI fails because it doesn't understand the human heart and doesn't understand rage, it doesn't understand hate, and they don't understand that the more Palestinians you kill, the more you train them to hate you. (01:11:05) And not only that, the world is turning against you. See, the AI program hasn't figured out the global factor that every time they do this, the world hates Israel even more. Hamas is a political organization. Hamas is a military organization. Hamas is an ideology, and you don't kill an ideology with weapons. You defeat an ideology with a better ideology, which is generally linked to a better lifestyle, better standard of living, economic prosperity. Again, Jane Carville's mantra, it's the economy. Stupid isn't just an American only. It's a global human reality Wilmer Leon (01:11:52

The Senate on Tuesday passed a foreign aid package with 22 Republicans in support. It would provide $60 billion of aid to Ukraine, $14 billion to Israel, and no provisions for the U.S. southern border. A winter storm dumped over six inches of snow on parts of the Northeast, including New York, Philadelphia, and Boston. The weather conditions left thousands without power, and hundreds of flights canceled. Meanwhile, a congressional district in New York state is holding a special election to replace George Santos. It's expected to be a close race between Democrat Tom Suozzi and Republican Mazi Pilip. Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) introduced a bill that would prohibit the federal government from removing any fencing set up by state governments at the southern border. And the House votes Tuesday night for a second time to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. Hostage and ceasefire negotiations for the Israel–Hamas war resumed in Egypt. Israel's spy chief, CIA director Bill Burns, as well as officials from Egypt and Qatar were present. ⭕️ Watch in-depth videos based on Truth & Tradition at Epoch TV

Torsten Slok, Apollo Global Management Chief Economist, says the Fed's easing of financial conditions could pose risks to the US economy. Cameron Dawson, NewEdge Wealth Chief Investment Officer, suggests that a potential repricing of rates would be a pain trade. Dan Ives, Wedbush Sr. Equity Research Analyst, says Apple's growth potential makes the stock a 'golden buying opportunity.' Gerard Cassidy, RBC Capital Markets Large Cap Bank Analyst, advises incorporating bank stocks into investor portfolios and believes we'll see further consolidation in the industry. Norman Roule, Center for Strategic & International Studies Senior Adviser, discusses the latest in the Middle East after a senior Hamas official was killed in Beirut. Get the Bloomberg Surveillance newsletter, delivered every weekday. Sign up now: https://www.bloomberg.com/account/newsletters/surveillance  Full Transcript: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane, along with Jonathan Farrow and Lisa Abramowitz. Join us each day for insight from the best and economics, geopolitics, finance and investment. Subscribe to Bloomberg Surveillance on demand on Apple, Spotify and anywhere you get your podcasts, and always on Bloomberg dot Com, the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business app. Right now, our conversation of the day. Synthesizing all this together. Torson Stock is chief economist at Apollo Global Management. Torson I'm going to pull in here a whole bunch of threads. The Bloomberg Financial Conditions Index is showing massive accommodation, and yet I look at the old liboard, the news, Sofa, sofr and I'm seeing huge restriction within the short term paper market tensions on Wall Street and the ill liquidity on Wall Street. How urgent is it for the FED to make some direction on a March cut or dare I even say a January first cut? Well, it has a number of different dimensions. First, there is a dimension on the real economy. It's clear that the FED pivot has eased financial conditions dramatically, and this begins to run the risk that we might see a repeat of what happened at the citycon Valley Bank. Remember Chris Waller just said a few weeks ago the easing of financial conditions in Q two that boost the GDP growth to five percent in Q three. Could we see the same now where the easing of financial conditions after the fat pivot might actually be boosting the housing market, the label market, services inflation, goods inflation. We are not out of the woods when it comes to battling inflation. So on the real economy, absolutely, the easing of financial conditions is very supportive. There are some issues when it comes to the plumbing when the tightness as you're highlighting in very short term markets, and the FED for sure has to play this difficult talk of wall between do we want to ease financial condition on the rial side or how much can we ease financial conditions in the very front end of the curve. But this is the challenge for the FED. At the moment that you're highlighting, Torsten, you didn't listen. They didn't respond to the idea of financial conditions. They didn't seem to think it mattered at all at the last press conference. Why should it matter now? I mean we're going to actually hear them come back and say, actually, just kidding about that financial conditions question. Well, they were debating in October and September, well maybe financial conditions have done a lot of the work for us, and now they're saying, well, maybe financial conditions it doesn't really matter because it can fluctuate so much. So I still think that it's a little bit inconsistent what they're saying when that data dependency, it only talks about the real data, whereas the financial conditions impulse. If you take the easy and financial conditions that we've had since the fit pivot and stuff it into furpose the fed's model of the US economy, you will get a boom of up to one and a half percent growth over the next slevel quarters in GDP. It's going to be very supportive as a tailwind to the economic outlook. Although we did have Ganadi on earlier of TD securities, and he said even with this idea that inflation could remain stickier, that we could get this ongoing growth, the FED could still cut rates and still be restrictive. Given the positive real rate. Do you ascribe to that kind of thing or do you think that just means many fewer rate cuts going forward for the Fed. I think that's absolutely right that we have. Of course, for the better part of the last year, we have talked about higher for longer. Now the conversation is more restrictive for longer, because they can still be restrictive if inflation is coming down, because real interest rates is what matters. So if real interest rates are still positive as inflation comes down, the fact and according you also gradually begin to lower rates. But note also that if you look at the outlook for sofa futures, as also Tom was mentioning, you still have that the bottom will still be around three and a half four percent. So one very important conclusion for as an allocation is that we are not going back to zero. We have still higher for longer, in the sense that the level of interest rates, the level of the free rate on page one in your finance textbook, will be significantly higher for the next several years than where it was from the period from twosand and eight to twenty twenty two. Let's try and get to the half of what we're discussing. Care the interest rates sensitivity of the US economy exactly. And now what we've seen over the last two years is rates go up aggressively and not slow down the economy. And what you're suggesting is that as rates start to come in and financial conditions ease, that the economy picks up again. Can you help explain that to people why higher rates haven't slowed the economy down but easy find financial conditions will boost it. Ye. But what's very important in that debate, and that's also taking place on Twitter and X of course here at the moment, is that my lift very critically sophisticate. Important to remember that that is significantly a function of whether you talk about the interest rate sensitive components of GDP or the non interest rate sensitive components of GDP. If you split GDP into the cyclical components and the non signal components, the main component that is sensitive to interest rates is housing. And housing did respond dramatically to higher rates. So this whole idea that the economy didn't respond to higher rates, that's just completely wrong. Of course, the economy responded to rates. It was the interest rate sensitive parts that responded to rates going up. Housing started slowing down. But the non interest rate sensitive components, in this case travel, restaurants, hotels. After COVID had such a long tailwind that that more than dominate the slow down in the housing market. So splitting that debate away from the academic textbook, which we all love, is so important because it becomes so critical to think about did the parts of the economy that are sensitive to interest rates did they actually respond? And absolutely, in particular housing Kapix also of COMMERCIALI state things that are sensus of two interest rates they did absolutely respond to when interest rates window. This is a fantastic explanation. So let's build on it. Let's project this out. What are the forecasts now for you for GDP in the next couple of quarters. We heard from the likes of Max Kanner of HSBC who said, the biggest risk right now is that we have to reprice rates again higher because exactly of what you're talking about, what are you looking for in the data? Well, if I type ECFCG on my Bloomberg screen, I will see that over the next six months we are very close to zero, zero point four and zero point five on GDP for Q one and Q two. So the consensus answer to your question is GP growth is continuously slowing as a result of the fat's campaign of hiking rates. The new risk that has emerged is that because of the fit pivot, that means that the interest rates sensitive components that we're dragging down GDP for the better part of last year, they might now begin to rebound. Housing most importantly, case SHILLA is now up five percent. Case SHILLA is a very important leading indicator for the OEI, meaning the shelter components of the CPI, and shelter makes up forty percent of the index, So that means that if something that makes up forty percent of the index is about to rebound, we could come back to that discussion about maybe the rates markets we'll have to reprise to higher for long gun and more restrictive for longer. I just looked at the two year inflation adjusted yield. I haven't looked at it since time began Nixon was president, and I can use the word never over twenty years, the integran, or the duration of a high two year real rate, we've never seen. We had a spike in eight with a great financial crisis, but these sustained high two year real yields are absolutely unprecedented for global Wall Street. How unstable are we right now? I would say, at least from a fet perspective. If you just take the economic textbook out and think about what matters, it is absolutely as you're highlighting real rates, So real rates being at these levels would tell you that we're still in very restrictive territory. So the challenge here for the FIT is that they still want to have the soft landing, and we all want to have the soft landing. That will be the best outcome, of course, from so many dimensions. But what is beginning to matter is that they have now sucked so much liquidity out. We've gotten to a point where we are beginning to see some strains in the plumbing that you're highlighting. And that's why real rates it has a very significant different impact on the long end and what it means for the real economy relative to what high real rates means for the front end and what it means for financial markets as host. And this has been an absolute Cameron Dawson joins US now chief investment Officer at New Edge Wealth Camic and morning and happy New year, Good morning, Happy nowear are you sitting on the fence because I'm written this first line in your work. It says we could have a scenario where both bulls and hairs are right this year, which one is it? Well, I think that we have to be nimble because I believe that there is going to be a scenario where you could very easily see people get drawn even further into this market. We think positioning is overweight, but not quite as is extreme as it was in times like twenty twenty one or twenty eighteen. So you could see some pain get pulled in. But the other reality is that you could see a rationalization of the fact that sentiment is very extended and that valuations are extended. So it's how you react to market rallies or market corrections, I think is how you will win. In twenty twenty four we mentioned that HSBC. So let's talk about the work coming from Max Kentna this morning. Here's this line, biggest risk another repricing and rights. Do you agree with that one hundred percent? That's the pain trade. The pain trade is that everybody thinks that inflation is fully vanquished and then gets surprised if things like oil prices move higher. Wages end up being stickier than expected rates move higher, and then all of those stocks that rerated in the last two months up thirty forty percent because now they're not worried about their balance sheets anymore. Balance sheet risk becomes an issue again, and you get a reversion of a lot of the names that were lower quality that happened to lead at the end of last year. The modeled out earnings are nine percent ten percent. Dare I say double digit eleven percent earnings growth for this year? Is that in the price now or is that going to develop out in the first half of next year. It is in the price now, and I think that we always have to think about the path of twenty four will be pricing in what actually happens in twenty twenty five. So if a recession looks more likely in twenty twenty five, that's when you'll start to see those earning estements get cut into the out years. The thing that's the biggest challenge for us for earning estments in twenty four is the expectation that top line growth will re accelerate in a year where nominal growth because of inflation is expected to decelerate. Can you see that happen at the same time where we get less inflation, less pricing power, and yet we get a big acceleration in top So away for the romance of Apple and Microsoft. If you look at Staples and discretionary and all, you've got to model out there, what you go back from a six percent wonderment of growth back to four percent revenue growth? Yeah, very likely. And there are idiots and pockets where you're going to see improvement. You know, healthcare had its earnings down almost twenty percent last year, that will flip positive this year just because of easy comps. So that's where we're trying to look outside of just the macro drivers, Staples being a great example of one that can't get away from this inflationary dynamic, and look instead to the more idiotsyncratic opportunities our banks to douse syncratic opportunities. And I ask with JP Morgan at new record high, Yeah, I mean you've seen such a huge rerating. Of course, there's pockets of banks where there is still inexpensive areas. You know, banks do have the tailwind of a less inverted curve, hopefully a reopening of capital markets. But then we have to consider things like BTFP, does it get re extended Basil three in game, all of these things that could be big drivers of bank earnings or at least appetite for bank risk as we go through twenty twenty four. It sounds like you're not buying the rotation story. I am buying the rotation story. Yeah. I think that we have to have an open mind that even great companies with great balance sheets, with monopolies could still underperform simply because positioning is so crowded and because valuations are so elevated. That's the smartest insight I've heard in the last forty eight hours. Are we going to have rotation or not? That's a really, really undersaid cool question. I think that that was really some of the anks behind the sell off that we've seen that was living, that was really led by big tech. We were talking about this yesterday with Apple, and I guess that you know, how much does that have legs versus what we saw last year, which was a headfake and everyone came in saying, all right, this is the year to sell tech, and by the end of the year of them was saying in Nvidia Magnificent seven, it's going to change the world. Kumba Yah it's going to save the United States, I mean, et cetera, et cetera. And what a different setup because at the very end of twenty twenty two you had record outflows from tech ETFs. You look at the course of twenty twenty three, you had forty billion dollars of inflows into technology compared to twenty billion dollars of outflows out of things like energy and financials and healthcare. So really this could just be about positioning and pain trades and the fact that you already re rated tech because now it's already just one turn away from its twenty twenty one peak valuation, so you're hitting a ceiling. Let's put a couple of stories together. You said, maybe the biggest paying trait the risk here is high, right, so reprice give rights again at Lisa brought up banks. How woud the banks respond to that given what we saw last year? Yeah, I mean it would raise balance sheet risk again. It probably puts into sharp focus again issues with commercial real estate because we've all kind of breathed this collective sigh of relief that higher for longer is dead if it's not dead, and the path of the cost of capital instead of the last forty years of being down is actually marching slightly higher and in a choppy path. Could mean that we have to reprice some of the risk in some of these balance sheets. Is it just JP Morgan then everyone else? When we talk about the banks, is that what we're talking about? JP Morgan then everybody else? We actually just are looking very deeply at some of the regional banks. Some of the regional banks are underpriced. We think if we look at the balance sheets, they're not as extended as or as issued as some parts of regional banks that some don't have as much commercial real estate exposure, have great presence in their local areas, so they're trading at very discounted valuations. If we're going down in value, that's one of the areas we're actually looking. Yeah, it's somebody at you know, the last five six, seven days at JP Morgan's capturing one out of five profit dollars in American banking. If that isn't the third or fourth or fifth national bank of the United States, I don't know what is. There is nothing else. It's JP Morgan versus everyone else. That's been a story the last year. I'll refer to our guests done this. But yeah, I mean they're capturing some twenty percent of profits according to the source. I'm sorry you don't have a source in front of me to side. I think it's it's the it's the Bramow newsletter. You know that newsletters. It's a muster r. It's a muster reader. Camic. Thank you got to leave this. It's going to catch up. It's going to say a happy new Year, Cameron Dawson, the new h wel let's get right to it. This is so important right now. Dan Ives joins us. He is a bull on any number of technology companies. We wait for him to come out on controlled data here and with a birecommendation at some point. That's a little bit of history there. Dan Ives with webbush Dan, what's a channel check? What exactly is a channel check? I just I just don't see it. Yeah, and look for us in terms of our easier supply gene checks, really trying to focus on what demand looks like in terms of the suppliers for iPhones. There have been no cuts from an iPhone perspective as of data, and I think that's that's bullets and ultimately that shows demand through howadays season has actually been on part, actually better than expected. And to me, that's what I focus on rather than the haters continue, Okay, but data tell Okay, you've been gracious about this, and they've been gracious about your twenty twenty three ganormous success. But when you do a channel check, are you counting iPhones? Are you over in China guessing the manufacturing line? Are you in the store on Madison Avenue looking at how many people from Lisa's family are buy an Apple loot? What's a channel check? Yeah? All above time. I mean, we feel we're in Apple stores around the country, around the world. We're also talking to suppliers basically trying to triangulate to what we think units is going to look like for the quarter and for the year. And that's how we've done it from the beginning, I mean, over the last decades so. And it's one of you're always gonna have different opinions. You just talk about the Barclays downgrade. We continue to stick with our checks. That that has navigated us, you know, a lot more right than wrong. I think when you look at I from fifty, it's easy to take shots, you know, relative to maybe some of the fears out there, especially fire and a crowd theater first day at the trading you know a year I it's a groundhog day. You know, we saw it last year as well. It's underestimated. Two hundred and fifty million. Is the install based upgrade cycle that's due in that window has an upgrade in four years, Dan, let's get into it. You mentioned Barkleys, Tom mentioned it too. I mentioned this, so let's get to that line. The continued period of weak results coupled with multiple expansion not sustainable in that it is a statement of fact, and then there's an opinion of the end. The statement of fact is iPhone cuts. They haven't been great for the last twelve months. That's the fact. Yet it's been coupled with multiple expansion, also a fact. The opinion piece is they're saying it's not sustainable. Are you suggesting that it is? Yeah, So what I'm suggesting is that the next three to four quarters you're going to have iPhone growth. You have growth coming out in China despite the fears and abs are the bare noise, and I think the most important thing is services, and I think services is going to be teenager type of growth. That's key to the multiples Manson story. And then we go into later this year, there's gonna be more monization from an AI as we talked about. That's gonna be the next layer. I think it all results and this is gonna be viewed as more of a golden buying opportunity rather than the start to hit the elevator exit. How much Dan, is your bullish call predicated on this idea of rate cuts, the idea of rates coming down as much as people think, yeah, look, that's probably five ten percent from multiple perspective. I mean, as we saw twenty two to the disaster twenty three in terms of now popcorn movement, in terms of FED gonna cut in twenty four. Look, it speaks to our overall bull tech thesis, right that the soft landing Killsberry do a boys soft landing. You're starting to see now more and more focus on tech. I do think now. You know, as Pharaoh's talked about multiple expansion twenty three, I think the numbers show it in twenty four. That's the difference. Twenty four is where the numbers come through, and tech twenty three was more than multiple expansion. Well, you mentioned China and how China demand is going to pick back up, But I wonder if it's going to be for iPhones. And I know we've been talking about this for a long time, but yesterday this caught my attention. The Chinese automaker BYD surpassed Tesla in terms of deliveries for the first time. You're seeing that really start to be a main theme. People said that that was never going to happen. People say that it's never going to happen, that Chinese consumers are going to throw out their iPhones. What makes you so confident that we're not going to see the same thing happen in the iPhone cycle that we're seeing right now in the electric vehicle one? Yeah, great question. And look, when you focus on Tesla, I mean that's essentially two horse race between TESTSA and BID. Tests actually beat numbers and China was strong for them. But I think it does speak to look domestically BID they're beast. I mean, they've done a phenomenal job, but Tessa is always going to be aware there in China. When you look at what's happening within the China market from an idphone perspective, it speaks to just a massive and all bays that they built in China. You have one hundred million iPhones in China right now, window of an upgrade opportunity, and the irony is despite geopolitical the last eighteen months, Apples gained three inch books of market share because the average high end, as in middle income Chinese consumer, they want an iPhone despite government basically trying to push WAWE. And I'm so pleased to Lisa brought up the EV comparison because I think that industry right now has the potential to be the industry story of twenty twenty four and beyond byd beyond Tesla. How much of a reality check are we getting for the industry for the likes of GM and Ford, I think a big reality shacka. That's why you've seen Farley. I think Mary they pull back, you know, in terms of a bit from the EV strategy in Detroit. And the problem here is do consumers want EV or they just want to tessel And I think that that's really the issue that's really starting to play out. And at this point, Tesla's doubling down on evs, but no doubt there's been I think much more moderate demand that we're seeing across the board, and you know, I think as that puts out, you're going to see others peel back while others go more aggressively, like the likes of the Tesla. I wonder what you think the endgame actually is. If you speak to the leadership at GM of thought, they've been generous with that time we've had this conversation with them. They talk about a change in execution, maybe not a change in strategy. Would you expect to see a change in strategy this year and what would that look like? I think slight changing strategy where maybe they pull back on some of their long term numbers in terms of EV when they expect to go fully EV you know, as a two thousand and thirty four thirty five. Look, the UAW also put their back against the wall. It's a different cost structure and they're trying right now to it's a tight balancing act that they're trying to get to in Detroit. And I think also it's tough going up against the likes of Tesla and some of these other evs. That's been a big part of the problem that they're focused on, especially now with the UAW. Increase in the cost structure, well said Dan. Going to hear from your happy new year, Sir Dan is Wetbush. Jere Cassidy, Large Camp Bank analyst that RBC Capital markets rights in this. After a tumultuous twenty twenty three, we believe the banks are our positioned for investors to warn outsize returns in twenty twenty four and investors should overweight the sector in their portfolios. Jer Cassidy, I'm pleased to say join us. Now let's go straight to it. Number one question. This is a question for me, and I know it's a question for Lisa. Is this off the back of high yields or lower yields? I would say John that we're expecting that the yields gravitate lower, especially at the front end of the curve when you take a look at what the Fed has done. If we truly are at the terminal rate for FED funds in the past four tightening cycles when they started to cut rates, it's always been a catalyst for bank stocks. And think what we're expecting as the market is that at some point in twenty four the Fed could cut your term interest rates. Is this for bank stops or is this for JP Morgan at least a very good question, because JP Morgan has been the risk off trade and it's been spectacular, as you guys mentioned, record highs. And so if we're going into a risk on environment, which I believe we are, if the FED is finished tightening, then actually JP Morgan is probably going to be a source of funds for many investors. It is a stock that is owned everywhere. It's been a great stock, but risk on may be the better way to go with a Bank America or City Group or others like that a source of funds. I love that it's a euphemism for it gets sold, so that you could raise money to buy something you think is going to return more the fact that you think it's going to be Bank of America. Do you also lean into the Mic Mayo idea that City Group and its whole revamp with some of its streamlining, hutting units, massive job cuts is going to be the real winner over time is going to be certainly an opportunity to be a winner. They've still got a lot of heavy lifting. Jane Frasier's leading the charge here, of course, and I think it's a very big, complicated job. It's turning around the notion liner. There's early progress, a lot of heavy lifting, as I said to do. But if she can succeed in the management, succeed this stock is definitely undervalued and it has great upside, but it's been a value trapped for many years, so we'll have to wait and see. Jarred I went to a seminar once at a firm long ago called Tucker, Anthony and Rlday, and I was lectured that banks are supposed to return nominal GDP plus a little bit. I'm going to center tendency. Is that make an eight, nine, ten percent once in your lifetime? JP Morgan has turned that upside down. You didn't see this coming. You're the expert, nor did anybody else. The returns of ten years, of twenty years or fifteen percent or so. Their thirty year return is solid double digit return. What did Harrison? What did Diamond get right? Tom? It's really Jamie Diamond. I think you could get give Harrison credit, I guess for merging with Bank one when Jamie Diamond was their CEO. And of course Diamond has taken over since then, and it's been his steadfast focus on delivering for shareholders, both through expansion and growth, but at the same time controlling expenses. They also have done a very good job in diversifying their revenue. Their consumer banking business, similar to Bank America, is very very profitable. On top of that, they've got a very strong capital markets business. The bear Stearns acquisition, which was very difficult in early years because of the reputational problems that came along with it, has worked out extremely well for them. So I would say the diversity of revenue, Tom and the focus on leading or delivering for shareholders. But back to Andrew Jackson, who you covered, you know years ago, Girardi, I mean, are they the fifth bank of the Uni United States? Over the holidays, somebody said one out of five profit dollars comes to JP Morgan. They're building their palace on fifth on Park Avenue right now. I mean to the Butch Cassidy idea, who are these guys? Are they the Bank of the United States. I don't think they're the Bank of the United States. But they have done a great job in delivering for their shareholders and for their employees and their communities as well. It's been a big growth engine for the company. This economy, the global economy as well. And again it's this leadership that they have under Diamond and his executive management team. And Tom, you know, many of his senior folks have left JP Morgan and are now CEOs of other banks, like Charlie Sharp at Wells Fargo, and so he's got a very deep bench and they execute. And that's the key. Tom. You know, banking is a commodity business. As you well know, it's all about execution. And JP Morgan is that you executed extremely well. What is the business model though, that you want to execute as a big US bank? Chard And this, I think is one of the key questions that we had during last year when the rise of private capital, private equity, private debt really was challenging the capital markets activity of certain big financial institutions. Can the JP Morgans, the Bank of Americas, the city groups get into the private debt world that in some ways has been stealing their lunch? I think it Ken, Lisa, And when you think about it, and you're right, the private equity private debt area is certainly growing much faster than the banks. But believe it or not, the shadow banking industry has been taking the bank's market share for forty years you go back to the early eighties and you look at the market share that the banks had of lending into the United States, it was well over forty percent. The private or shadow banking market was in the low twenties. Today it's completely flip flopped. The bank's market share now is in the low twenties and the shadow banking is in the fifty over fifty percent. So the banks have done it through consolidation. You know, when Tom and I were young, we had over eighteen thousand banks in the United States in the early nineteen eighties. Today there's forty six hundred. JP Morgan has been a big beneficiary of that, and they've been able to create those efficiencies. So yes, they can compete. They will compete, and I don't think that the banks are going to be put out of business, but certainly they don't have the market share that they used to have. But we have to remember too, the economy has grown dramatically in forty years, and they have the smallest slice of the pie, but they're more profitable than ever, not just JP Morgan, but other banks as well. What about the smaller banks, Given the fact that you're talking about a bigger slice of just overall activity. You haven't seen that so much in the smaller banks, and with rates forbading high, you're going to have real commercial real estate pressures as well. It's interesting, it depends on you know how small the bank is and who owns it. I've always maintained this banking system we have in the United States is obviously very polarized. You got the very small banks at one end and the very large banks at the other end. And if it's a non if it's if the owners of the smaller banks, private banks, or mutual savings banks or another group of banks, if their owners are comfortable with earning returns on equities of four or five percent, and they're not going to sell the bank as long as they have FDIC insurance, they're going to remain in business indefinitely. On the other end, if you do have a bank with thirty billion in assets and it's not earning up to what its shareholders want it's to earn, then they're going to have to consolidation. Consolidation is going to continue. We're in a pause right now, but the long term trend has been consolidation in the industry will continue to consolidate in the future and argue, Jared, let's finish on Washington if we can. I was speaking to your colleague Amy with Silverman just yesterday and were reflected on a line that came from Lori Cavasina, who I think described presidential politics in the election on the horizon like staring at the sun. I just wonder if that's what it's like for you. Have you given any thought to changes in leadership in Washington and what might mean for the companies to fall under your cover? John, It's a good question because it's going to be the topic du jour this year, of course, with the election coming. And what we can say is that under the current administration there's been more regulation of banks, particularly with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. We don't know who's going to be running, you know, just yet in November, but if Trump is the candidate for the other party, the Republican Party, and if he was to win, his administration had less regulation for banks. So if that administration was to come back, you would have to expect they would change the heads of different regulatory agencies in twenty twenty five, and it probably would be less regulation for the banks as we move forward, you know, Johnny. I think Bloomberg Radio is missing it today because we're seeing the fireplace with your dacity here on Bloomberg Television talks about inflation South Paris, Maine. Three hundred and twenty five dollars per cord of red oak that's delivered to Shake Cassidy and he's he's popping like eight night cords of winter. He used a thing about that. I mean, it's adding up. It's expensive. But don't you love the smell. The smell's great. The damn dog is over by the fireplace. The smell you know, this dog's called Elizabeth. We won't call Aaron. We want to thank you, Joe Capital of Marcus, Thank you, sir. Let's get to it, and we do it with an authority that we have had through Auto Tournament of the Eastern Mediterranean. Norman rule joins us now senior advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the courses work for the nation in intelligence. Norman. When I say Lebanon, for all of us of a certain persuasion, we are completely formed by something frankly is stunning forty years ago, which is the Beirut Barracks bombing. When we lost marines at accountable iwo Jima level. Where are we now with Lebanon, with Hesbela, Do we have a relationship? Was it forever fractured forty years ago? That's an excellent point, and I regret I remember that incident well and lost friends. The event of forty years ago actually had a different message for the world. The US pulled out of Lebanon at that time, and Osama bin Laden later stated that watching the withdrawal of the United States from Lebanon was one of the motivators for him to undertake his operations because he realized the West could be pushed back out of the region. Are we being pushed back now? I mean within the multiple fronts at Lisa Abramowitz's outlined this morning Gods of the West Bank and again up to the border with Lebanon as the West is America being pushed out now? No, we have a very different profile, and indeed, diplomacy is likely going to increase in intensity and come out weeks because we need to come up with a way to move. Lebanese has belowed north of the Israeli border so that Israeli citizens can return to their homes. The thousands tens of thousand of Israeli citizens to open their businesses, go to school, and also so that tens of thousands of Lebanese can return south to that border which has become such a flashpoint in recent weeks. Yeah, hundreds of thousands of people have been misplaced or displaced as a result of some of the fighting on both sides. But Norman and I'm curious whether this is an escalation the fact that Israel did attack according to Hamas, but also with a wink, wink, nod nod from Israeli officials to kill this is Mamas executive. Well, to be clear, Israel has stated from the beginning of the October seventh massacred that it would eradicate the Hamas leadership responsible for that action, and therefore this is no surprise. I think what you have to look at is this drone attack, which Israel has not admitted but is understood to have undertaken, took place in an incredibly secure, prey conscious neighborhood, and it demonstrates an exquisite and dynamic intelligence capacity. So as Hesbula thinks about it's connor its response to this, it's got to think about what is known around us and what can we get away with and what will happen to the people who might be involved in that attack against Israel. Do you have any sense, Norman, of what the conversations are like with Hamas, with Hesbelah, with the Iranian leadership, given the fact that a lot of people think that they're taking some cues from Iran, that there has been funding from Iran, that you have the Iranian warship going to the Red Sea, and the huthis also Iranian fact making noise and trying to interrupt Western shipping lines. Iran It's proxies have no strategic drivers to involve themselves more fully in this conflict. It would impact multiple strategic equities for a game that is uncertain that they have multiple incentives to continue and perhaps raise the intensity of attacks against Israel to show that they have skin in the resistance game. I should also note that today, the January third, is the fourth anniversary of the killing of Cossum Solomoni, and that's a day when one would expect Iranian proxies to attack US or Israeli versus just for that symbolic anniversary. Exactly where I wanted to go normally let's talk about it, the assassination of the major General. It's easy to forget that it ever happened because several weeks later, many weeks later, we were all drowning in a global pandemic. What has happened since then with the relationship between the United States and Iran, between two different white Houses, very little. The indirect engagement that took place did produce the possibility of some sort of engagement, a hostage released by the Iranians in exchange for the release of personnel. But Iran's regional activities did not change, and I don't think the White House expected them to change. More So, Iran's nuclear program has continue to expand. And here's the important point. Iran is now producing enriched uranium at level that no state that is not pursued a nuclear weapon has ever produced. It has no civilian use for the nature of its current enrichment. So you have to ask yourself the question, has the West de facto recognized the Iranian military nuclear program? The White House would say no. The facts do raise the question. Norman a tough way to Segui here, but I'm going to do it as one final question. Taiwan continues to come up within our first of the year conversations. Do we have good intelligence on mainland China? The United States intelligence program against China, has stated by Central Intelligence Agency had Bill Burns, is robust and works significantly. I won't comment on those operations to the extent that I know of them, but I will say that this remains such a priority that it's an all source intelligence programs at all imagery and a variety of different aspects. We're going to have a good understanding of some of China's activities that will provide the warning policy maker's need for the update. You're insights so valuable, Norman Roll there for the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Thank you, sir. Subscribe to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast on Apple, Spotify and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live every weekday starting at seven am Eastern. I'm Bloomberg dot Com, the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business app. You can watch us live on Bloomberg Television and always I'm the Bloomberg Terminal. Thanks for listening. I'm Tom Keen, and this is BloombergSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Listen to Mike, Matt and special guest Bill Burns battle for Sonic the Hedgehog supremacy! We take 16 of Sonic's best adventures and have them battle it out tournament style for the best Sonic video game. See which games go deep! Follow us @halloffamepod Email us athehalloffamepod@gmail.com --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thehalloffamepod/message

On today's podcast: 1) As the truce between Israel and Hamas enters its final 24 hours, negotiators from Qatar, Egypt and the US are pressing for an extension to try to secure the release of additional captives and avert a resumption of a war that erupted almost two months ago. 2) Charles Munger, the alter ego, sidekick and foil to Warren Buffett for almost 60 years as they transformed Berkshire Hathaway Inc. from a failing textile maker into an empire, has died. He was 99. 3) Billionaire investor Bill Ackman is betting the Federal Reserve will begin cutting interest rates sooner than markets are predicting.   Full transcript:  Good morning. I'm Nathan Hager and I'm Karen Moscow. Here are the stories we're following today. We begin with the war in the Middle East. This is the final day of an extended six day ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. The Palestinian group handed over a dozen more hostages last night, ten Israelis and two citizens of Thailand. White House National Security spokesman John Kirby says he hopes the ceasefire can be extended so more Americans can be freed. I don't want to I'll give you a handicap here on this or bet nods. I can just tell you that we want to see all the hostages out. The way to do that is these pauses. My White House spokesman John Kirby spoke with reporters outside Air Force one CIA director Bill Burns is and caught her for talks about extending the ceasefire. Secretary of State Anthony Blincoln will be back in Israel later this week, and in a post on ex President Biden called for an end of the fighting. He says Hamas fears nothing more than Israelis and Palestinians living side by side in peace and now Nathan the financial world. EA is mourning and remembering the life of Charlie Munger. Munger, who helped build Berkshire Hathaway with Warren Buffett, died yesterday at the age of ninety nine, and we have more with Bloomberg's John Tucker, John and Karen with wit, wisdom and one liners. Charlie Munger served as Warren Buffett's alter ego, often telling it with brutal honesty what wouldn't work. Munger was known for steering Buffett away from purchasing what Buffett called cigar butts mediocre companies had a puff of smoke left and could be bought for very cheap prices, and instead favoring quality. A lawyer by training, Monger recalled how he was steered toward investing when I met Warren. He immediately started telling me how much better his way of making a living was than mine, and that I was too smart to stay in such a silly businesses law practice when I could go into his business of running an investment partnership. And it took me about two or three years to realize he was right. His death, Lee's Buffett without his law time sounding board for investors, maybe his most enduring legacy is Berkshire's performance under their management. Berkshire average an annual gain of twenty percent from nineteen sixty five through twenty twenty two. I'm John Tucker, Bloomberg Radio. All right, John, thanks, of course. Charlie Munger is also going to be remembered for his roles as straight man and scold of corporate excesses at Berkshire's annual meetings in Omaha. Bloomberg Intelligence Senior analyst Matthew Pallasola remembers Monger's special relationship with Warren Buffett. They're recalling individual meetings that they had, you know, forty fifty years ago, and Bussett is forgetting a couple of things, and Munger's reminding him of, well, this guy said that, and we said this, and we made this much money in these meetings. I mean it was, you know, truly a partnership for all of that time. And their interaction was just amazing. They would finished each other sentences, and Bloomberg Intelligence Senior analyst Matthew Pallasola there. Charlie Munger died yesterday at a hospital in California. He was a longtime resident of Los Angeles. Well Nathan, we turn to the market, specifically the economy now and billionaire investor Bill Ackman, who's betting the Federal Reserve will begin cutting interest rates sooner than markets are predicting. I think there's a risk of a hard landing if the FED doesn't start cutting rates, you know, pretty soon. So I think the market expects sometime middle of next year. I think it's more likely, probably as early as key one and Bill Lackman added that he's not convinced the US economy is headed for a soft landing. The billionaire investor made the comments in an upcoming episode of The David Rubinstein Show. Here to Beer Conversations on Bloomberg Television. Well Karen Bill Ackman's comments come as two of the fed's most hawkish rate setter signal they could be comfortable holding rates steady for now. Here's what FED Governor Christopher Waller told the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. I am increasingly confident the policy is currently well positioned to slow the economy and get inflation back to two percent. Chris Waller's view as echoed by a fellow FED governor, Michelle Bowman, who said she remains willing to support great hikes if inflation progress stalls, but she did stop short of endorsing an increase next month. Well. In Washington, Nathan, the House of Representatives may be voting on whether to expel George Santos today or tomorrow, and Bloomberg's Ed Baxter has that story. Motions in the House have been formally introduced, saying ethics findings violate the accepted policies of the body. Now, many of those members who voted against the first one November one, are saying they will vote to expel now, and Santos has responded saying the body is just theater. I went to San Diego last week. It is terrible, terrible. That's what we should be putting our energy on, not on censuring one another, expelling one another, which hunts against the political class. Nobody cares. Congress has forty eight hours to act under the resolution. Ed Baxter Bloomberg Radio, Okay and thank you. President Biden won't be there, but Vice President Kamala Harris this is attending the COP twenty eighth Climate Summit in Dubai. We get details from Bloomberg's Amy Morris. Harris will join Secretary of State Anthony Blincoln and other US officials at the two week event that begins tomorrow. She is expected to address the summit this week. Formal negotiations at COP twenty eight will center on the response to warnings that countries are falling short and cutting their emissions, and possible commitments to phase down fossil fuels in Washington, Amy Morris, Bloomberg Radio. All Right, Amy, thanks for the Incorporate news and a surprise memo. Jack ma urged Ali Baba Group to correct course civilionaire call for fundamental change across the company he co founded decades ago. Ma has mostly stayed away from day to day operations since twenty twenty, and Ali Baba wants China's best candidate to become a trillion dollar company is trading at a fraction of its peak in twenty twenty. Time now for a look at some of the other stories making news around the world. For that, we're joined by Bloomberg's Amy Morris. Good morning, Good morning, Karen. Congressional negotiators are reportedly ready to drop plans to use the annual defense policy build of Titan controls on US investment in Chinese technology. Sourses tell Bloomberg that House Financial Services Chairman Patrick McHenry is effectively blocking a measure that would require firms to notify the government about certain investments in China and other countries of concern. The Biden administration meanwhile getting pushedback from auto dealers on those mandates for switching over to electric vehicle production. Bloomberg's Nancy Llons has that part of the story. The mandate calls for two out of every three vehicles sold in the US by twenty thirty two be battery electric, but nearly four thousand auto dealers, who are calling themselves EV Voice of the Customer say most car buyers, even with incentives, are disinterested in the technology due to the higher cost, the lack of charging stations, and the loss of driving range and hot and cold weather. The dealers are asking President Biden to slow down and let the battery technology and infrastructure improve before forcing EV purchases. The White House says the proposed standards are not a mandate and do not ban gas vehicles in Washington, Nancy Lyons Bloomberg Radio Republican Congressman Anthony Disposedesposito made a motion on the House floor to force a vote on House Ethics Committee Chairman Michael Guests resolution that would expel Congressman George Santos. Minutes later, Santos took to the House floor himself to defiantly say he will not resign. Are we to now assume that one is no longer innocent until proven guilty, and they are in fact guilty until proven innocent, Or are we now to simply assume that because somebody doesn't like you, they get to throw you out of your job. The House Ethics Committee report alleged Santos used campaign cash to pay for personal expenses. He's also facing federal charges. A US military Osprey aircraft carrying eight people as crashed into the sea off southern Japan. The Japanese Coast Guard is heading to the site for search and rescue operations. Host Guard official says they don't have details yet about what happened to the osprey nor to the people on board. He says the Coastguard received an emergency call from a fishing boat near the crash site off Yakushima. The osprey was believed to be heading to Okinawa. Global News twenty four hours a day and whenever you want it with Bloomberg News Now. I'm Maybe Morris and this is Bloomberg Karen. All right, Amy, thank you well. We do bring you news throughout the day right here on Bloomberg Radio. As Amy said, but now you can get the latest news on demand whenever you want it. You can just subscribe to Bloomberg News Now to get the latest headlines at the click of a button. Get informed on your schedule. You can listen and subscribe to Bloomberg News Now on the Bloomberg Business app, Bloomberg dot Com plus Apple, Spotify, and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Time now for the Bloomberg Sports Update, here's John stash Hour John Darren. The NBA started this season with an in season tournament to drum up some interest early in the regular season, taking a page out of what you see in European soccer. Last night they determined which eight teams are advancing to the knockout round next Monday. In the East, Boston will play at Indiana, and then on Tuesday it's the Knicks in Milwaukee. Monday in the West, New Orleans and Sacramento, followed the night later by Phoenix at the Lakers. The winners will advance in the semifinals December seventh in Las Vegas, with the championship on December ninth. Minnesota Timberwolves have the best wrecker in the West. They won last night. They're thirteen to four. They're not advancing, but the Knicks are. They beat Charlotte one fifteen to ninety one. The Celtics moving on. They're eight to zero. At home, they beat the Bulls one, twenty four to ninety seven. Jalen Brown scored thirty. Milwaukee got thirty three from Jannis on to the compo in a one to thirty one to one twenty four win at Miami College Hoops and the sec ACC Challenge the SEC one four, including twelfth rank Kentucky beating eighth rank Miami ninety five to seventy three. We heard from the College Football Playoff Committee. Time we'll hear from them will be Sunday with the final four announcing who's going to be in the playoffs. Georgia's rank number one. Michigan, with the big win over Ohio State, moves up to second. Everyone moves up a spot. Washington now third, Florida State fourth, Oregon fifth. Washington plays Oregon on Friday for the pac twelve Championship Ohio State. With the loss dropped the sixth John Stasheward Bloomberg Sports from coast to coast, from New York to San Francisco, Boston to Washington, DC, nationwide on siriusxam, the Bloomberg Business app in Bloomberg dot com. This is Bloomberg day Break. Good morning. I'm Nathan Hager. On this final day of an extended six day ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, the Palestinian militant group is handing over more hostages and pressure is building on both sides to see if this pause in the fighting can be extended even further. For the very latest, let's go to Tel Aviv and check in with bloom Israel Bureau chief Ethan Bronner. Ethan, it's good to have you back with us. What are the prospects that we could see this ceasefire extended beyond today? Hey, Nathan, I think the prospects are pretty good. I think that both sides have been comfortable with this pause, they would like it to extend. I think it's a breather for Hamas, it's a breezer for the Israeli defense forces, and also it allows more humanitarian aid to get into those in great need who are suffering from hunger and the outbreak of disease in Gaza. And of course it's bringing back to Israel hostages. So the deal is, you know, ten hostages a day, another day of a ceasefire, and it seems like that could go on at least two more days. Will it be a ceasefire or could it be a resolution to this conflict? We've seen commentary from President Biden himself one of his latest posts on the social platform X saying that Hamas fears nothing more than Israelis and Palestinians living side by side. To continue down the path of terror, violence, killing and war is something we can't do. Is pressure building to end this war? It is? And that was an interesting tweet. I don't know if you still call it a tweet. An interesting post on X by the President which suggests that he is slightly moving away from a full embrace of an Israeli continuation of the war. I think it's a little hard to tell. The Israelis very much want to destroy Hamas, and they believe they can, and they believe they must take this opportunity to do so. They believe that they want to get as many hostages out as possible and then go back into war. It is clearly the case with the President and many many people abroad think that the war has should stop. Too many people have died, too much suffering has occurred. And I think that politically President Biden is worried. He's also facing internal dissent in his own administration. But you know, it could also be that they sort of thread this needle in the way that allows the Israelis to go ahead in some days time, but in a way that is more targeted, there's less civilian death, and that allows them to declare a victory. We shall see. Are we seeing that play out in the thinking among Israeli officials leaders in Israel that we could see a more targeted approach and what would that look like? Yeah, and what would that look like is a great question. We are it's very very hard at the moment to get any transparency on what the next military phase will look like. When you ask, you're told, sorry, pal, we're not sharing it with you. But it is clear from public statements and also from pressure from Washington, that they have to reduce them the kind of bombardment that began in these first weeks of this. This is now almost an eight week conflict, and it is clear that they want to go after the leaders of Hamas and it's military infrastructure. They are saying that they've killed about five thousand Hamas guys. They were saying there were about thirty thousand of them, So you know, from their perspective, they've made progress, but they've hardly gotten everything they need. Now, what would it mean to go in a more targeted way. You're going to have two million people sort of crowded into the southern part of Gaza. I don't know how you're going to go get underground there without killing people. So I don't know how they're going to do it, but that's clearly something the Americans are demanding of them before they let this go forward. What do we know about the hostage releases that are expected today, Well, we know that these rulis have been given another list of ten. Again, only women and children have been and gate involved in these exchanges so far, and I expect there'll be more women and children in the next day or two. Then the question is would they get to some men, some soldiers and that's I think a more difficult thing. So far, it's been three Israeli three prisoners Palston prisoners for each hostage. That may have to change. Yeah, we do know that there have been talks underway and caught her with the CIA director Bill Burns to potentially get that ceasefire and hostage deal extended beyond women and children, something else for us to follow. And no, we will be doing that as well. Ethan Bronner, thank you so much for being with us this morning. Ethan Bronner, Israel bureau chief for Bloomberg News, joining us this morning from Tel Aviv. And now we want to bring you our conversation with the founder and CEO of Pershing Square Capital, Bill Ackman. He says the Fed's going to cut rates sooner than many of us expect. Bill Ackman joined Bloomberg's David Rubinstein for peer to peer conversations. They discuss the FED, the outlook for the US economy, and the twenty twenty four presidential elections. So let's bring you part of that conversation right now. I do think the economy is weakening. We're seeing evidence of that in some of our companies. You're seeing I have some concerns. There's been a huge subsidy in terms of low interest rates and companies. Most companies fix their rates or their debt at very low rates, and certainly real estate investors did the same. And that works until it doesn't work, And so I think we're what's going to be interesting is to see what happens when people get have to reprice their debt, and I think that can have sort of a cliff like effect, and you're certainly seeing that in real estate now. The markets are assuming, and the markets are not always right, but the markets are assuming that there's going to be a FED discount cut sometime next year. As we talk now just about the end of November. It's not clear what the Fed will do. But some people say that the Fed, if they were to cut interest rates next year year, would help the Democrats and therefore be seen as very political. The other hand, some people say the Fed can't wait till after the election because the economy might need a stimulus. So you have a view on what the Fed is likely to do. I think they're gonna cut rates, and you know, I think they're gonna cut rates sooner than people expect, because you know, what's happening is the real rate of interest ultimately, which is what impacts the economy, keeps increasing as inflation declines. Right, So if the FED keeps rates in the sort of middle fives and inflation is you know, trending below three percent or you know, that's a very high real rate of interest, and I think that is having a sort of retarding effect on the economy. And then of course, again you know, many businesses and certainly many individuals have the benefit of fixed rate debt, and that fixed rate debt, certainly for companies and for commercial real estate, starts to roll off. So I think there's a risk of a hard landing if the FED doesn't start cutting rates, you know, pretty soon. So you know, I think the market expects sometime middle of next year. I think it's more likely probably as early as key one by its own and miss and the FED probably missed inflation initially they said it was transitory, but they played catch up and they've increased rates considerably since that time. Do you think the FED made a mistake in not handling inflation differently at the beginning, And how do you think they've done since they started increasing interest rates? They certainly made a mistake. I mean, I think they would have FED generally as an institution, would admit that. I think that they caught up and effectively. So you give them credit for acknowledging the mistake and being pretty aggressive. And then I think, you know, you want to make sure that they're you know, German Powell's desire not to have a legacy of causing or contributing to long term inflation, doesn't, you know, cause them to make the opposite mistake, I mean, keep rates too high for too long, and I think the market expectation is you know, called it middle of next year, July something like this for the beginnings of easing. I think the economy will likely demand an earlier move. And I don't think of the FED as a or at least this FED, a particularly political institution. I think they're really trying to do the right thing. President Biden has called his economic program biden Nomics, which has met some derision in Republican circles. You've been an active supporter of Democrats, I think more than Republicans. Is that right? I would say historically I have you know, I would say today I certainly consider myself and have for years now a centrist, okay, and I'm much more open to Republican candidates that I am to re electing President Biden. So I you know, you would say otherwise. You know, again, I want to elect the best leader of the country, whether that person is a Republican or a Democrat. But you haven't publicly said you're supporting President Trump if he's the nominee. Ye. I've been supportive of you know, I've been supportive of Nikki Haley. I've been supportive of Chris Christy, I know, the vag Ramswani and I was, you know, pre his launch of his candidacy, I was, uh, you know, supportive of his having a young, smart, talented, uh you know, business leader as a next president. He's just been a little too far off, too far to the right, and also been disappointed a bit with his you know, geopolitics and how he's thinking about dealing with some of the wars that we find ourselves in the midst of today for the economy itself. Do you think it really is going to make a difference if President Trump is if he's the Republican nominee it gets selected, or President Biden is the Democratic nominee he's selected, who either one. Would it make a big difference for the economy in the next year or so if either one is the president or the economy is going to do what it's going to do. You know, I do think leadership matters enormously in everything from the economy to geopolitics, and I hope we're going to have a broader selection than Trump and Biden. There's actually an interesting candidate who just announced his candidacy on the Democratic side that I would say, no one has heard of a congressman named Dean Phillips. You probably have heard of him, may know him. Met with him recently. I was impressed. I think the best I think Biden done a lot of good things, but I think his legacy will not be a good one if he if he is the nominee, I do think the right thing for Biden to do is to step aside and to say he's not going to run and create the opportunity for some competition of alternative Do you think that I think that I think he's past his prime in kind of meaningful way. I think the global security, I would say, and is going to become a very high profile issue for I think the country. I think people are concerned about what's going on in terms of Russia, Ukraine, you know, the Israel Hamas situation. You know, Russia and China are pretty belligerent today. Our relationships are not good. So I think you know, you, I do think of It's a bit like being CEO of a major company. It's a it's a it's a full time job, and you need to be at your you know, you need to be strong, you need to be at your intellectual best. And I don't think Biden is there. This is Bloomberg Daybreak Today, your morning brief on the stories making news from Wall Street to Washington and beyond. Look for us on your podcast feed at six am Eastern each morning, on Apple, Spotify, and anywhere else you get your podcasts. You can also listen live each morning starting at five am Wall Street time on Bloomberg eleven three to zero in New York, Bloomberg ninety nine to one in Washington, Bloomberg one oh six to one in Boston, and Bloomberg ninety sixty in San Francisco. Our flagship New York station is also available on your Amazon Alexa devices. Just say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty plus. Listen coast to coast on the Bloomberg Business app, seriusxmb iHeartRadio app, and on Bloomberg dot Com. I'm Nathan Hager and I'm Karen Moscow. Join us again tomorrow morning for all the news you need to start your day right here on Bloomberg DaybreakSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Mandy Xu, CBOE Global Markets VP & Head of Derivatives Market Intelligence, advises monitoring multiple asset classes going into the year-end. Michael O'Leary, CEO of Ryanair, says the airline remains committed to Boeing despite delays in aircraft deliveries. Amanda Lynam, BlackRock Head of Macro Credit Research, says there's an increased focus on selectively from credit investors. Julie Norman, UCL Centre on US Politics Co-Director, discusses the Israel-Hamas war and Antony Blinken's visits to several leaders in the Middle East. Ashley Allen, Franklin Templeton Corporate Credit Research Analyst, discusses resilient consumer spending. Get the Bloomberg Surveillance newsletter, delivered every weekday. Sign up now: https://www.bloomberg.com/account/newsletters/surveillance    Full transcript: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Lisa Abramoids along with Tom Keen and Jonathan Ferrell. Join us each day for insight from the best in economics, geopolitics, finance and investment. Subscribe to Bloomberg Surveillance on demand on Apple, Spotify and anywhere you get your podcasts, and always on Bloomberg dot Com, the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business App. I'm DeLine of joined us now at a macro credit research at black Line I and I don't worry. We're not going to be talking about that. I do want to talk about supply if we can start there. We've got forty eight billion dollars a three year notes this week, We've got forty billion dollars a ten year notes. We've got some thirty year bonds twenty four billion dollars worth. These are big, big numbers. That's treasury supply. What's happening with credit supply going into year rent, Good morning, Thank you both for having me so. As you know, credit supply had a bit of a flurry of activity in September. It calmed down in October. I do think with this tentative stability in the treasury market that corporates, CFOs and treasures may look to move ahead before the year end seasonal slow down. It will be an important test for the market how this treasury supply is digested. But as we know, the Treasury Secretary guided us towards the front end of the curve and not so much in duration in the refunding announcement last week. But I actually think, if nothing else, the past several months have shown corporates that this can be very episodic in terms of these windows opening, and so given that we know the maturity walls are coming up, I think for corporates it's better to issue early rather than late. We're expecting a big week in the IG market this week. I think expectations are a little lower in high yield, but I would not be surprised if we surprise to the upside in terms of those expectations, because I think it's just prudent for CFOs, which speaks to kind of the opportunism that one Sidi get desk told me about last week. He messaged me as soon as we saw this rally and he said, everyone's trying to come to market. I've gotten fifteen phone calls. Everyone's basically lined up. Is this going to be bad? With credit spreads widening in the sort of counterintuitive way because we've got more supply, I think the appetite is there, and I think we've had such light supply, especially in high yield year to date, and twenty two was a record a low level that I think the appetite for the market is there. I think where the real risk is is it that lowest quality cohort of the triple C market, that kind of lowest quality rung of high yield which are triple C issuers. There. I think we've seen some enhanced pressure where it's weak results coupled with refinancing needs have really pressured those capital structures. And even on this swift rally in high yield spreads that we've seen over the past few trading sessions, triple c's have rallied, but they've lagged on the way in. And I think it's the market telling you that there's an appetite for certain quality cohort in the credit market. Ig I think is there in most market conditions. Hig yield is a bit more tentative, but for that lowest quality rung, I think it's very case case specific and vary idiosyncratic. Are people kind of just pricing in perfection here? Well? With high old spreads below four hundred, it's hard to argue you that there's much risk premium added into the market at the moment. I think what we're seeing is a lot more focus on selectivity from our credit investors, so thinking about asset allocation between high yield and leverage loans, sector selection, issuer selection. I think where we're high old spreads are at the moment, the path of least resistance is probably a little bit wider in terms of choppiness, with some of the headline risk ahead of us. But again, as we've talked about before, where yields are, it's really difficult to see kind of highield spreads breaking out in this range of much wider from here, because when you every time, we tried to reach four forty last week and we kind of snapped back in, and so there is a bit of a tug of war between fundamentals and technicals, and even the most vulnerable fundamental pockets of the market have been the best performer, Like leverage loans. You mentioned the decision set between loans and say high yield help our audience understand what goes into making that kind of decision and whether that's changed in the last few weeks. So it has changed in the last few weeks because for a few reasons. One is, if you think we're at the end of the rate hiking cycle, if you think we've seen stability in long end rates, you might think that the bulk of the loan outperformance is behind us at this point. And indeed that yield pick up that leverage loans were offering over high old bonds has narrowed. So what we are seeing is a bit more interest, say even within capital structures, of investors saying Okay, well I'm in the loan, should I rotate into the high old bond or given the fundamental pressures of this higher for longer rate environment, that we're expecting our loans disproportionately impacted by that because they've been contending it with it for a longer time. Again, we don't view fixed rate bonds as immune from that in many instances, but I do think on the margin, given the strong performance of loans here to date, there is some refocusing on Okay, is the bulk of that loan performance behind us read some life into that just a little bit more. We sort of big equity move last week. If you're looking at a and I know it's unique and idiosyncratic, but ultimately just give us the thirty five thousand foot view. If you're looking down a capital structure right now, is the bias to be higher or lower in Actually, you know, I think the high end of the highield market has actually outperformed the low end of the IG market. So it's not as clear cut as saying be underweight high yield versus IG. There are a lot of nuances there. I do think for choice, I would prefer to be higher in quality within high yield in IG. I think moving down into that triple beat cohort is a relatively nice place to be. For the most part, the vast majority of those corporates are committed to maintaining investment grade ratings. You are picking up a bit of a spread pickup relative to the highest rate cohort. I think that's important in this current environment, especially if we don't get a severe downturn in growth. So I don't mean to be overly basic about this, but when you take a step back, I do wonder if we do get coalesce around this higher for longer kind of idea. Does it make sense that we're not going to get any kind of major default cycle, either in public credit or in private credit. If we're looking at benchmark rates that are five percentage points higher than when all of these companies were bar in bulk not so long ago, it's a great point, Lisa. So we are seeing a modest uptick in defaults. Were it just under five percent in the US when you combine high yield and leverage loans, that's well off the rock bottom levels of twenty twenty one and twenty twenty two. Do we break out to the levels that we saw in COVID eight and a half nine percent, I think, barring a severe downturn, I don't see it. Part of the reason is that corporates have entered this period in a really strong position. The other part is that the investor appetite, to your point, John, is there. And then third, I would say corporates are actually shifting to a more balance sheet friendly posture. So we haven't seen a lot of debt funded m and A, we haven't seen a lot of debt funded share buybacks. They're still investing in capex, still investing in debt repayment in terms of uses of cash. But I do think corporates do have some discipline. I think the real risk is that if there's a severe downturn in growth coupled with just a capital market's freezing such that these corporates don't have access at any price, I think it's I think it's difficult. As for the private credit point, historically we look at losses between the two markets, and private credit losses have held in better than public credit losses. Part of that is because the enhanced flexibility that those corporates have. We think that holds true. But I think the point remains, we're expecting an ongoing normalization higher and losses across all those asset classes not extremely given where we know where the maturity will is. Can you identify what would be the least optimal time to have any canoa down to and is that what's basically on the horizon now? So I think probably the biggest risk is that if corporates try and time this opportunistically, they let the year end play out, they think the environment will be better in the first half of twenty twenty four, and then we have some sort of shock, whether that's geopolitical unforeseen risk contraction. We're watching bank lending very closely. Although that has actually played out I think a bit more benign than we would have thought. That is the risk. I think that if corporates try to be almost too strategic about the timing and they cut it too close. We saw that in the financial crisis, where some corporates we're shut out. So that's why I think, if I'm a CFO or treasure, better to issue early rather than late. At a Lisa's point, maybe we get a lot more supply in the coming weeks and months based on what we've seen develop over the last few weeks. No matter, thank you always great. I'm out of line in there of black Rock. Michael I literally with this around the table to Ryan CEO. Michael, I wish people could see your face, as said Basting, wispeak it just to get some reaction. It's going to see you. Good morning, It's great to be here, John, Lisa, good talk to you again. Well, thank you, buddy. You've had earnings out this morning. We've been talking about this dividend of four hundred million euros. We've got to talk about this relationship with Boeing. I want to share a couple of quotes with you and then try and get some clarity. So you said in the last week, if anything, it's getting worse. I would have been reasonably confident up until about a month ago that we'd get fifty seven aircraft by the end of June. I'm not confident. We heard from your CFO this morning. So the worst case scenario is that we'll end up with growth of forty seven aircraft next summer instead of fifty seven. Help me understand where things are. What did you want and what do you think you're going to get? Yeah, I mean ourkis so we are contracted to deliver as fifty seven aircraft by the end of April twenty fourth, in other words, fifty seven additional aircraft for summer twenty four. At the moment that has slipped by the spirit production issues, in which it all Boy's own production issues in Seattle. I think now it looks like we'll get they'll leave us maybe ten short by about the end of June. We're hopefully we get forty five fifty aircraft by the end of June. We said the point we're not taking planes in July and August because frankly, we're too busy. But we're reasonably hopeful that we'll get forty five fifty aircraft front. They will leave us short. I think that's inevitable at this point in time, which means we'll have slightly slower growth next summer, but we'll still add forty five aircraft. It'll still be enough to enable us to grow traffic from one hundred and eighty three million passengers this year to just over two hundred million passengers. It's for a number you have in mind whereby you would have to cut capacity the next summer. There isn't. I mean, we haven't yet announced what the capacity will be next summer. As we said this morning, we have ninety percent of our summer twenty four capacity already on sale. Strongforward booking is good pricing, but we can't commit to the last ten percent until we get a better picture from Bowie. I speak weekly with Dave Calhoun. I think he's doing a good job in difficult circumstances. I have less faith in the management in Seattle, but I think you know, we're working closely with them. We have our own people in Seattle. We have our own people in spurting Wichita and anything we can do to expedite these deliveries will do because growth is so strong in Europe. What is it about the management in Seattle what they're getting wrong? I think there isn't enough focus there on a daily basis on how do we get in with these aircraft out? Everybody is kind of ringing their hands blaming Wichita. You know a lot of the issues are in Seattle as well. They need a more crisis I would like to see greater crisis management in Seattle and greater focus on quality control. You know, I don't understand how Wichita Spurt and Wichho We're able to have this succession amount of production problems if BOE's quality control was up to speed. Do you have options options in terms of what do you do if you don't want to work with Boeing anymore? I don't know. Let's say we want to work with Boeing. We're Boeing's biggest customer by a mine in Europe. We're a committed Boeing customer. Now I would buy Airbus aircraft if they were five percent cheaper per seat than Bowing. But Boeing continue to beat Airbus on pricing. The seventy three seven Max is a phenomenal aircraft, like we now this summer we've flown one hundred and twenty five of the Max eight aircraft. We're carrying four percent more pastures, we're burning sixteen percent less fuel. You know, they're transformative in terms of the engine and aircraft efficiency. We've ordered three hundred Max tens, which will allow us to carry two hundred and twenty eight passengers per fight and burn twenty percent less fuel. So they're making great aircraft. It's just they're not making them on time or delivering them in time. Is it fair to say, though, this is a relationship you're stuck with regardless of what it delivers next year. I mean yes, you know we're committed to Boeing. If you look around the world, the aircraft manufacturers, i mean Airbus are no better than Boeing at the moment. Airbus are way behind on their deliveries too. You have the and Whitney engine, which is going to be a real crisis next summer across the A three twenty fleet in Europe. You know, the part and Whitney engine is going to ground a significant number of airbus aircraft next summer. So all of the air craft manufacturers are challenged. We're a very proud Boeing customer. I think Boeing will get its act together. It's just taking a bit longer than we had originally hoped. In the meantime, how far can you jack up prices if capacity is constrained? I mean I think that the real issue for at least is not how much will we jack up prices? How much will Luftansa or France IAG or BA keep jacking of prices? And the answer is a lot. You know your control estimate this sumwhere Europe's operated about ninety four percent of pre COVID capacity, That includes US growing by twenty five percent. So take Ryan air away. Europe still at less than ninety percent of pre COVID capacity. That's not changing next year. The aircraft manufacturers are delivering aircraft late the part and whitneys will mean five ten percent of the airbus street will be grounded. And consolidation. Lufthanso will buy al Italians, somebody else will buy TAP and there'll be even less capacity on offer. Okay, so this is good news for you because you don't have to really have to try too hard to be the lowest cost aircraft while still raising prices. How much you're going to raise prices next year, we're price passive, load factor active. I think what's happening is how much if Lufthansa Air France Scalem will drive up fares I think by a double digit number next year. It will send even more people in the direction of Ryanair. People want to keep flying, Families want to go on holidays. They just don't want to pay off hands as outrageous prices. So I think fares that next year, I mean my operating assumptions fares will go by a low double digit percentage again through the summer twenty four to be the third year in a row, third summer in a row, we'll see double digit fare increases. In Europe. This is the first year in the first time that you're initiating a dividend YEP, it's a four hundred pounds dividend. It is the first time. Does this mean that you have nothing else to do with that money? Essentially? Yes, you know, I mean some of the first time we've done it. We've done special differdence in share buybacks, We've done about seven billion in share buybacks and special dividends. But you know, we're clearly generating a lot of cash at the moment. We've paid down about two billion in debt. We're down to our last two billion in bond that we'll pay that down over the next three years, and we're generating more cash that we know what to do with. We have specific requirements. Firstly was to do pay increases for our people who worked with us during COVID. Secondly was to pay down the bonds, and thirty is to fund aircraft deliveries. But we're running out of the existing order. We take the last aircraft in December twenty twenty four. The first of the Max tens doesn't rive toll January twenty seven, so we're looking into two or three years. So we have effectively very little uses for cash, and I think it's a commitment on our part. We'll return to shareholders. We won't squander it the way many other airlines do in m and A or buying hotels or whatever, or Delta or as Delta would do, giving monstrous pay increases to its pilots over the next four or five years. We need to keep our cost low keep our efficiency high and keep passing on on beatable air first to our customers. Do you think scheholders then can expect more of the same of an xt few years. I think so as long as trading continues. You know, who knows what's going to happen in Ukraine or in the Middle East. But as long as we get a reasonable wind on trading, then I think we will continue very cash generitive and we will return large amounts of cash to share. It's hard to know what is going to happen in Ukraine in the Middle East. I don't expect you to give us a projection. I do want to understand, though, Are you saying things slow down in any way, shype or form when you start to see these things escalate anything that's a no. I anyway, we saw the initial when Russia invade the Ukraine in February twenty twenty two, twenty two or three account Remember you know, there's a sudden downturn in all of our traffic into Poland, Romania those countries. It recovered after two or three weeks. We've had to suspend We're suspending all flights. We've about thirty flights a day into Tel Aviv. They've been suspended until Christmas, so we do want to see those scenarios resolve themselves. But the ultimate underlying trend across Europe we've locked up everybody for two years in COVID. They all want to go back. Traveling families want to go on holidays. We've just completed the October midterm break. We were still full, and I think what people want is to travel more. But there's only ninety percent of the pre COVID capacity. So in Europe you've constrained capacity enormous demand and that is resulting in very strong priceing, not just for right there, but for all of the airlines. Are you're noticing any trite down? I had to describe it as trite down from b to Ryan abbat United saying anything like that. Not at the moment, but you know, I think it's inevitable if the next year or two, if consumers are under pressure, I think you know, you'll see the little and all these are the supermarkets. Ikea will do very well and Rhine will do very well. So what about using some of the cash to make the experience nicer for people who might be frustrated with at least it'd be impossible to make the experience on Rhinier any nicer. You know, new aircraft on time flights, the fewest cancelations of any airline in Europe. But I don't understand why people pay such ridiculous air force for a horrendous experience on Lafanza. Who lose your bag, miss your connection? On Rhiner it's efficient, it's cheap, it's on time, and it is blow like a man four million people. Once upon a time, Did you live like I had to do on a road show a year ago. I had to fly from Frankfurt to Zurich, which is only about a one and a half hour flight, so they stung me for nine hundred euros one way in economy and I was sitting at the back, in the middle seat, in front of the toilet on an age Vice A three twenty. I mean seven hundred jews. I can fly all year round on Ryan here for seven hundred jurors. Michael, It's good to see it, Thanks John, Lisa, Thank fantastic. Got to see Michael Leary there the Ryan Air CEO. I'm at the line of joined us now at a macro credit research at a blackground and I don't worry. We're not going to be talking about that. I do want to talk about supply, if we can start there. We've got forty eight billion dollars of three year notes this week, We've got forty billion dollars a ten year notes. We've got some thirty year bonds twenty four billion dollars worth. These are big, big numbers. That's treasury supply. What's happening with credit supply going into year end? Good morning, Thank you both for having me so. As you know, credit supply had a bit of a flurry of activity in September, it calmed down in October. I do think with this tentative stability in the treasury market that corporate CFOs and treasures may look to move ahead before the year end seasonal slowed down. It will be an important test for the market how this treasury supply is digested. But as we know, the Treasury Secretary guided us towards the front end of the curve and not so much in duration in the refunding announcement last week. But I actually think, if nothing else, the past several months have shown corporates that this can be very episodic in terms of these windows opening, and so given that we know the maturity walls are coming up, I think for corporates it's better to issue early rather than late. We're expecting a big week in the IG market this week. I think expectations are a little lower in high yield, but I would not be surprised if we surprise to the upside in terms of those expectations, because I think it's just prudent for CFOs, which speaks to kind of the opportunism that one that he get Desk told me about last week. He messaged me as soon as we saw this rally and he said, everyone's trying to come to market. I've gotten fifteen phone calls. Everyone's basically lined up. Is this going to be bad with credit spreads widening in the sort of counterintuitive way because we've got more supply. Yeah, I think the appetite is there, and I think we've had such light supply as especially in high yield year to date, and twenty two was a record a low level that I think the appetite for the market is there. I think where the real risk is is it that lowest quality cohort of the triple C market, that kind of lowest quality rung of high yield, which are triple C issuers there. I think we've seen some enhanced pressure where it's weak results coupled with refinancing needs have really pressured those capital structures. And even on this swift rally in high yield spreads that we've seen over the past few trading sessions, triple c's have rallied, but they've lagged on the way in. And I think it's the market telling you that there's an appetite for certain quality cohort in the credit market. Ig I think is there in most market conditions. High yield is a bit more tentative, But for that lowest quality rung, I think it's very case case specific and very idiosyncratic. Are people kind of just pricing in perfection here? Well? With high old spreads below four hundred, it's hard to argue that there's much risk premium added into the market at the moment. I think what we're seeing is a lot more focus on selectivity from our credit investors, So thinking about acid allocation between high yield and leverage loans, sector selection, issuer selection. I think we're high old spreads are at the moment the path of least resistance is probably a little bit wider in terms of choppiness, with some of the headline risk ahead of us. But again, as we've talked about before, where yields are, it's really difficult to see kind of highield spreads breaking out in this range of much wider from here, because when you every time, we tried to reach four forty last week and we kind of snapped back in, and so there is a bit of a tug of war between fundamentals and technicals, and even the most vulnerable fundamental pockets of the market have been the best performer, Like leverage loans. You mentioned the decision set between loans and say high yield. Help our audience understand what goes into making that kind of decision and whether that's changed in the last few weeks. So it has changed in the last few weeks for a few reasons. One is, if you think we're at the end of the rate hiking cycle, if you i think we've seen stability in long end rates, you might think that the bulk of the loan outperformance is behind us at this point. And indeed, that yield pick up that leverage loans were offering over high old bonds has narrowed. So what we are seeing is a bit more interest, say, even within capital structures, of investors saying Okay, well I'm in the loan, should I rotate into the high old bond or given the fundamental pressures of this higher for longer rate environment, that we're expecting our loans disproportionately impacted by that because they've been contending it with it for a longer time. Again, we don't view fixed rate bonds as immune from that in many instances, but I do think on the margin, given the strong performance of loans here to date, there is some refocusing on okay, is the bulk of that loan performance behind us? We read some life into that just a little bit more. We sort of big equity move last week. If you're looking at AG and I know it's unique and it is syncratic, but ultimately just give us the thirty five thousand foot view. If you're looking down a capital structure right now, is the bias to be higher or lower in it? Actually? You know, I think the high end of the high old market has actually outperformed the low end of the IG market. So it's not as clear cut as saying be underweight high yield versus IG. There are a lot of nuances there. I do think for choice, I would prefer to be higher in quality within high yield in IG. I think moving down into that triple beat cohort is a relatively nice place to be. For the most part, the vast majority of those corporates are committed to maintaining investment grade ratings. You are picking up a bit of a spread pickup relative to the highest rate COHORT. I think that's important in this current environment, especially if we don't get a severe downturn in growth. So I don't mean to be overly basic about this, but when you take a step back, I do wonder if we do get coalesce around this higher for longer kind of idea, does it make sense that we're not going to get any kind of major default cycle, either in public credit or in private credit. If we're looking at benchmark rates that are five percentage points higher than when all of these companies were borrowing in bulk not so long ago, it's a great point, Lisa. So we are seeing a modest uptick in defaults were it just under five percent in the US. When you combine high yield and leverage loans that's well off the rock bottom levels of twenty twenty one and twenty twenty two. Do we break out to the levels that we saw in COVID eight and a half nine percent, I think, barring a severe downturn, I don't see it. Part of the reason is that corporates have entered this period in a really strong position. The other part is that the investor appetite, to your point, John is there. And then third, I would say corporates are actually shifting to a more balance sheet friendly posture. So we haven't seen a lot of debt funded M and A, we haven't seen a lot of debt funded share buybacks. They're still investing in capex, still investing in debt repayment in terms of uses of cash. But I do think corporates do have some discipline. I think the real risk is that if there's a severe downturn in growth coupled with just a capital market's freezing such that these corporates don't have access at any price, I think it's I think it's difficult. As for the private credit point, historically we look at losses between the two markets, and private credit losses have held in better than public credit losses. Part of that is because the enhanced flexibility that those corporates have. We think that holds true. But I think the point remains we're expecting an ongoing normalization higher and losses across all those asset classes, not extremely given where we know where the maturity will is. Can you identify what would be the least oportable time to have any economic down to and is that what's basically on the horizon now? So I think probably the biggest risk is that if corporates try and time this opportunistically, they let the year end play out, they think the environment will be better in the first half of twenty twenty four, and then we have some sort of shock, whether that's geopolitical, unforeseen risk contraction. We're watching bank lending very closely, although that has actually played out I think a bit more benign than we would have thought. That is the risk. I think that if corporates try to be almost too strategic about the timing and they cut it too close. We saw that in the financial crisis, where some corporates were shut out. So that's why I think if I'm a CFO or treasure better to is you early rather than late. At at least's point, maybe we get a lot more supply in the coming weeks and months based on what we've seen developed over the last few weeks. Matter, Thank you always great amount of line in there of black Rock joining us now is Judy Norman, the co director of the UCR Center on the US Politics. Judy, always wonderful to catch out with you. You've articulated this, the pressure to articulate and endgame given what's developed over the last couple of weeks. Do you see sense that that pressure is ramping up once again over the weekend? Well, I think it is John and very much from the US increasingly on Israel, mostly behind the closed doors, but starting a little bit more publicly as well. And this has really been an issue since you since the after October seventh, to trying to figure out what would be next for Gaza after an Israeli operation. There are many different options that are considered, but really none of them seem to be very good for either Israelis or for Palestinians. Israelis un Palestinians are not looking for a ReOC patient of Gaza. Some have floated the idea of the Palestinian authority, the West Bank governance having a role in Gaza, but they are very weak, very illegitimate, and also I think would not take on that role just yet. And the US is even exploring some options of saying having a multi national transition kind of group there, some kind of almost like a peacekeeping force. But again, all of these are very tentative options. And I think crucially right now is trying to identify what Gaza might look like after this in a way that is, you know, not just a continued downward spiral for both Gazans and Israelis. Judy. As we can all see at the moment, the administration domestically facing pressure from all corners, Judy, from your position, can you identify any kind of success this administration is having convincing the Israelis of having some kind of humanitarian pause, convincing it Israel of changing its approached somehow. Is there any kind of success you can identify? Yeah, John, So, I would say the US came out very strong and supportive Israel, and some in Israel have called this a sort of bear hog, a public embrace but also a private restraint and kind of some whispers in the ear. So this has started from the beginning, and I think most importantly Blincoln was pushing for a humanitarian pause over the weekend that does not look forthcoming at the moment. Some areas where they have had some success is starting to get a bit more aid into Gaza. There are currently about one hundred trucks now coming into the Gaza Strip per day. Before the invasion. That was about five hundred trucks a day, so still much less than is needed, but more than was coming in for several weeks. The other area that they had some temporary success was getting communications reinstated in Gaza, but I understand over the weekend there have been more blackout so that seems a bit inconsistent. So I think that pressure for humanitarian pauses will continue. For Israel, I think they see that as perhaps halting the offensive, and they're halting their overall aim of ousting Hamass. But for others that is just seen as absolutely necessary for both getting aid into the strip and getting people out, So I think Blncoln will keep focusing on that. And I would note now who suggested that if hostage isbury leased, that might open up some room for a humanitarian pause. So I think we'll see more focus there in the coming days, Julie, what I've found more interesting rather than Tony Blinken going to Israel was all of the other meetings he's had on this particular tour. Right now, he's in Anchora in Turkey. There's a question over Bill Burns and his relationship with Jordan, the head of CIA, and his tour in the region. What is our sense right now of some of the regional countries and their position, their involvement both in what's happening now negotiating with Hamas, but also some solution after this conflict is over sure. So I think there's a couple different facets to this. One is, again the short term, trying to get other Arab states to also back this idea of humanitarian pause. Most leaders are very forthright about calling for a full cease fire, so Lincoln was trying to get some space there as well as just keeping diplomatic channels open. The second was really in terms of trying to keep the conflict contained and trying to avoid flare ups in other Arab countries and in other areas, especially like Iraq, where US troops are stationed and where there are Runi and proxy groups operating, so trying to kind of quell any potential flare ups and just further dispersal of this conflict. And the third, as you mentioned Lisa, is again trying to look ahead to what that endgame might be and what the role of Arab states might be within that. Again, would Arab states be part of some kind of multinational you know, transitional authority or force or something like that. Again, right now, I think most Arab leaders are reading the room pretty clearly with their own populations, who are very sympathetic to the Palestinian cause and are not going to stick out their neck too far for what the US is pushing for. But at the same time, you know, work quite closely with the US and some of these states with Israel as well, and so needing to kind of find that middle ground. So a lot of diplomacy happening that I think will be just continuing wholeheartedly over these next couple of days. As President Biden lost the room with his own party at this point, given his approach on this conflict, I would say it's very clear that the Democrats have a lot of internal divisions over this conflict, and this isn't new to Biden. And I think he knew with an issue as difficult as Israel Palestine, you are probably never going to please everyone, especially in a party like the Democrats, which are pretty split on this issue. Now he's getting a lot of very vocal criticism from many on the left, from many progressives, and from many on the pro Palestine side. But I think he's also getting a lot of support from more traditional liberal Democrats who appreciate the solidarity that he's shown towards Israel. So in some ways, again, you're not going to please everyone. And again, right now, the US is trying to find a very difficult middle road and kind of thread this needle between supporting Israel but also trying to minimize casualties and think ahead to what might be next and what might be best for the region. It's going to be incredibly difficult for the president going to get too next year, Jurney. Just to finish, net poll from the New York Times over the weekend, big lead to for the former president Donald Trump in Arizona, Georgia, and Michigan, Nevada, and lead in Pennsylvania as well. Judy, your thoughts on that as it came out over the weekend, Yeah, this is going to be a big wake up call for Democrats and for the Biden campaign. We've been seeing these neck and neck numbers for Biden and Trump for quite a while, but to really drill down to the six swing states and see that five out of the six Trump is leading with less than a year until the elections is quite notable. And again, this is a little bit different than past elections because both of these both of these men are known quantities everyone and someone like Trump, everything is out there already, So I don't see a lot of this necessarily changing. Obviously, polls a year out, our year out. But I think for Democrats who thought, you know, Trump was going to be an easy target or something like that, it's clear that Biden has a lot of work to do and that's you know, it's going to be challenging for him to keep his coalition together. So I think we'll see some different strategies emerging pretty soon. Hiy, Judy, Thank you, Judy Norman of the US Sales Center on US Politics. Thank you joining us now. I'm so glad to say. Is Ashley Allen, corporate research analyst at Franklin Templeton YU counuigh in maybe I'm Birkenstack, But more importantly, thank you so much for being here, because to me, the big question really is how resilient is a consumer? After people have been saying that they're running out of their savings month after year after month, have we reached a point where you actually are seeing evidence of that? Maybe? And I think it's been maybe for a few months, to be fair, but I think we find ourselves in a really interesting situation right now, especially following three Q earnings. We just heard from a handful of staples companies from restaurants. Consumers are still spending, especially on some things that they'll want to indulge in, whether it's coffee, sweet treats in the grocery store, so that the stata is backward looking, so we have to keep that in mind. But up until this point, again, resilience has been the word that economists are said over and over. They're still showing up to spend on the things that make them feel good. How much in some of the earning calls that you've been tracking and just some of the communication that you've had with corporate officers about what they see going forward, how much do they see this continuing in a durable fashion just based on how much wages are increasing and the fact that the label market is strong. I don't think it's durable, at least at the same level that we have sustained thus far. A lot of the resilience that we've seen on the top line has been driven by price volumes, let's call them flat plus or minus on either side, both in kind of the restaurant space, but also in staples. If you think about the CpG companies in the grocery store, volumes have kind of flat lined, so where they can consumers have technically been pulling back from a volume perspective. They're consuming less. Companies have just realized that they can still benefit from taking price that likely can't continue you forever going forward. Well, a lot of people will argue that a lot of the household balance youes look pretty good. So if people want to lever up to get a latte a double mocacino, they can do that. Is that what we're actually seeing that people are just continuing with indulgences, but levering up to do so. Potentially, I don't necessarily it's always a maybe, right, I don't necessarily think that they're leveraging up to buy their latte. But I think if you have to look at the bigger picture macro, if you think about millennials broadly speaking, who maybe are waiting to buy their first home, if you can't do that right now, I would argue that, you know, spending seven bucks on a coffee isn't going to impact your ability to buy a home the same way the Fed would in regards to their rate policy. So I think from a consumer perspective, it's less so about them leveraging up, but a bit more about the bigger macro picture, what they are spending on and how they're supported by jobs to be frank as well. So as an investor, sure do you recommend then consumer discretionaries that are the small luxuries in life that people seem pretty committed to. Yeah. So there is something called the lipstick effect, which we've seen before, specifically, you know, in regards to beauty, where women will still spend on small luxuries to make themselves filtered during times of economic stress. I think that same the pattern or thesis could easily be applied to sweet treats. To think about you know, oreoles or cookies that we like as well as well as just the occasional splurge in regards to dining out and whether that's at you know, full price restaurant. Maybe you're okay spending you know, twenty bucks on your fast food meal that at one time they will indulge, especially during times at economics spress. Do you buy the holozembic argument. Not yet, it's TBD. I do think, you know, these drugs are really powerful for the individuals that they were originally designed to help, maybe those with type two diabetes or who are severely overweight and obese. But consumer habits really die hard, and I think that it might take more than ozebic, at least in its current form, to change those patterns to zooming out. We were just speaking with Veronica Clark over at City Group and she was talking about how they expect a soft patch now and then a reacceleration and inflation because a lot of consumers just keep accepting prices where they are. Do you agree with that, just based on sort of a company specific kind of analysis, I think that if consumers, if the can keep their wage gains that we've seen recently, if they can, if those can be persistent there's a good chance that they will continue to accept the price gains. I think it's as a matter of who's going to blink first. Is it the consumers or is it going to be the corporations in regards to pulling back on price to drive volumes or consumers finally going to reach a point where they say, hey, you know what, I don't want to spend six bucks on a box of cereal anymore. I don't want to buy that seven dollars CLO fee. But as long as they're supported by jobs and some wage gains, I think you know they'll continue to spend. Which raises this question when you talk to corporate executives and they can pass along these costs, are they then hiring more people? No, because at the end of the day, corporates are also responding to markets. Broadly speaking, they're trying to recover the margin that they lost over the past eighteen months or so when inflation and input cost really got out of control. Margins became compressed. At that time, profitability was hammered. They've benefited these past few quarters from those price increases in conjunction with falling input costs. Now, to be fair, those costs haven't completely reverted, but profitability has been strong from them. And for the most part, this is very idiosyncratic, but companies have been rewarded when their bottom lines, of course have expanded or reverted to pre pandemic levels. So is it's just zooming out to wrat this. I guess there's this question of whether some of the legacy retail companies and whether the legacy service companies can continue to operate and thrive based on their capital structures, you know, borrowing costs that was a lot lower from another era that they were going to have to refinance at a higher rate, whether they are still incredible companies to invest in in a current environment. Are you basically saying that yes, because they're able to pass along those costs to consumers that have continued to really go for the products that they're selling. Yes, they've been able to pass along the cost But the maturity wall, broadbly speaking, has been pushed out for several corporates, including those in retail indiscretionary names. And so you know, they have balance sheets these days in the cash fload to support you know, the interest expense that they have now in three or four years when their maturity wall comes to do, we'll see where we are and we can address it at that time. But at the moment, balance sheets are strong, the cash is coming in, they can make their payments, and they're passing along those higher prices. What are the strongest segments of retail right now? It's a great question. Broadly speaking, beauty as a segment that's continuing to do well. Historically, pet has been a segment that's been strong, but we have seen some weakening there. It's probably a bit of a post pandemic trend that's reversing. But people are sick of spending their entire paycheck on Fido. Ashley Allen, thank you so much of Franklin Templeton. We really appreciate that. Subscribe to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast on Apple, Spotify and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live every weekday starting at seven am Eastern on Bloomberg dot Com, the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business App. You can watch us live on Bloomberg Television and always on the Bloomberg Terminal. Thanks for listening. I'm Lisa Abramowitz, and this is BloombergSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What's Behind Rumors of Assange Plea Deal, Bill Burns' Record on Ukraine and NATO, How The US Could Beat the Heat

On this day, July 5th, in legal history, jury selection began for the trial of the Chicago “Black Sox” baseball players accused of throwing the 1919 World Series.The Black Sox scandal, which unfolded during the 1919 World Series, was not an isolated incident in the history of baseball and gambling. The sport had a long-standing and often troubled relationship with gambling, with instances of game-fixing dating as far back as 1865. The integrity of postseason championship play had also been questioned, with rumors surrounding the honesty of games in previous World Series.The exact architects of the Black Sox scandal have never been definitively identified, but it is believed that White Sox first baseman Chick Gandil and Boston bookmaker Joseph "Sport" Sullivan played key roles in devising the plot. Testimonies from grand jury hearings suggested that Gandil and star pitcher Eddie Cicotte were the primary instigators. However, the scandal involved several other individuals, both inside and outside the team, making it a complex web of conspiracies.One popular theory, first presented by the defense lawyers during the trial, suggested that the motivation behind the fix was the miserliness of White Sox owner Charles A. Comiskey. However, this claim has been debunked by salary data that showed the White Sox had one of the highest payrolls in the league, with players like Eddie Collins, Ray Schalk, Buck Weaver, and Cicotte earning competitive salaries.The White Sox team was plagued by internal divisions and factions. One group, led by Eddie Collins, consisted of educated and self-assured players, while the other, headed by Gandil and Cicotte, was made up of more blue-collar players who harbored resentment toward Collins and his clique. This division played a significant role in the scandal.According to Cicotte's testimony, discussions about fixing the World Series began among his faction during a train trip late in the regular season. Cicotte started exploring the possibility of financing the fix with Bill Burns, a former pitcher turned gambler. The allure of the $10,000 payoffs allegedly received by some members of the Chicago Cubs for throwing the 1918 World Series against the Boston Red Sox further fueled the desire for a similar windfall.Reports of player misconduct and corruption were often disregarded by the baseball establishment and the media. The game seemed to have abandoned serious disciplinary measures against gambling-related activities. Even credible charges made by respected figures like Christy Mathewson failed to result in action. Thus, by 1919, the players viewed the World Series fix as a low-risk, high-reward opportunity due to the perceived lack of consequences.In mid-September, the Gandil-Cicotte group solidified their commitment to the fix during a meeting at the Ansonia Hotel in New York. The involvement of the White Sox's second-best pitcher, Lefty Williams, and their star outfielder, Shoeless Joe Jackson, further increased the likelihood of success. They agreed to intentionally lose the World Series to the Cincinnati Reds in exchange for a substantial $100,000 payoff.This tragically would lead to Kevin Costner's 1989 film Field of Dreams being conceived of and, with no one there to stop them, produced and released. The Black Sox ScandalLabor negotiations between United Parcel Service Inc. (UPS) and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters have reached a stalemate, increasing the likelihood of a strike by more than 300,000 UPS workers. Talks between the two parties collapsed after weeks of discussions, leaving the US supply chain vulnerable to disruption if an agreement is not reached soon. The Teamsters blamed UPS for refusing to meet workers' demands, while UPS claimed that the union had halted negotiations despite a generous pay offer. The current labor contract, which is set to expire at the end of July, requires a few more weeks for member education and ratification. UPS shares fell 2.1% in response to the news. The negotiations have been challenging, with disagreements over pay, cost of living increases, and the perceived disparity between worker wages and the company's pandemic-related profits. The possible strike comes amidst a broader wave of labor unrest in the transportation sector, including disputes at ports and rail strikes.Companies with tailor-made picket taglines should handle labor with an especially tender touch – “What can brown do for us? Provide a fair cost of living increase!”UPS Drivers Head Toward Possible Strike as Labor Talks Stall (2)Paul Hastings, a Big Law firm, is facing a lawsuit filed by Redwood Liquidating Co., a biotechnology company based in California, alleging negligence by the firm's lawyers. Redwood Liquidating claims that the mistakes made by Paul Hastings attorneys during the company's attempt to remove its founder, Hesaam Esfandyarpour, from the board resulted in a loss of $300 million in value and ultimately led to bankruptcy. The company had hired Paul Hastings to implement corporate governance reforms and appoint new leadership, including a CEO and three independent directors. However, the Delaware Chancery Court ruled the written consents invalid after Esfandyarpour sued, rendering the new directors invalidly appointed. Redwood Liquidating states that the litigation drained its remaining cash, caused investor concerns, disrupted financing, and forced the company to file for bankruptcy and liquidate its assets. Paul Hastings denies the allegations and considers the lawsuit meritless, expressing its intention to defend itself in court. In addition to this case, the law firm is also facing conflict of interest claims from another client, The Coca-Cola Co., in a separate lawsuit.Paul Hastings Sued by Ex-Client Accusing Lawyers' NegligenceSuspended Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton will not testify in his upcoming impeachment trial in the state Senate, according to his lawyer. Paxton, who was impeached on charges including bribery, is temporarily suspended from office pending the trial. The Texas Senate will try him on 20 articles of impeachment, and if two-thirds of the 31 senators find him guilty, he will be removed from office. The impeachment was triggered by Paxton's office requesting that the House fund a $3.3 million lawsuit settlement he reached with four whistleblowers. Paxton has denied any wrongdoing and is also under a separate corruption investigation by the Justice Department. His attorney stated that they will not comply with what they perceive as an unfair process.Suspended Texas Attorney General Paxton won't testify at impeachment trial | ReutersIn this week's column I take a look at senior property tax relief policies generally, with an eye toward's New Jersey's StayNJ program specifically. New Jersey's property tax relief program, StayNJ, which offers a 50% reduction in property tax for homeowners aged 65 and older, has sparked a debate about the fairness of such policies. While I acknowledge that some seniors struggle with rising property taxes, the concern is that these relief programs come at the expense of other groups facing similar financial challenges.One issue with the proposal is that it creates a complex tax policy puzzle, with funds being reallocated to address school budget shortfalls or to manipulate school performance metrics. This pits seniors against families with children, as zoning restrictions and housing demands favor one group over the other. Seniors, who often have more home equity, are better able to absorb property tax increases.Furthermore, senior property tax relief programs often coincide with cuts in school budgets. Programs like StayNJ are designed to keep seniors in the state, benefiting school resources by reducing the number of students in the public school system. This can positively impact metrics such as school expenditures per pupil, but it also means fewer resources for education overall.In some cases, zoning restrictions are used to provide property tax relief for seniors, effectively excluding families with children from certain areas. The policy trade-off favors seniors, leaving families with fewer resources and options. The shortage of affordable housing exacerbates the situation, as seniors receive incentives to stay in their homes while younger individuals face higher costs.Reverse mortgages are an option for older homeowners to access their home equity without monthly payments, helping them cope with property tax reassessments. However, this option is limited to those aged 62 and older, leaving younger homeowners with fewer alternatives like home equity lines of credit, which require monthly payments.While it is important to support seniors financially, these policies should be examined holistically, considering the impact on other groups. Seniors generally have lower poverty rates compared to younger age groups, and their housing costs decrease over time while healthcare costs rise. While assisting seniors is commendable, policymakers must be mindful of the broader effects on the marketplace.New Jersey Property Tax Relief Pits Babies Against Baby Boomers Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

This week, Kate and Ian tackle something of a mega Celebrity Seance, with the late Bill Burns' televised seance back in 2000. What two Hollywood greats do we check in with? Why Marilyn Monroe and Andy Kaufman. If anyone can make sense of that pairing, its probably not us...

Today on the show, Hunter Biden is now being forced to show up for court. Plus, the current CIA director Bill Burns had a close relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Yes, you read that correctly. Aerosmith just announced their farewell tour, and Logan already has tickets.Topics Discussed:- Hunter Biden fighting in court- Jordan may move to Arkansas- Code BROS at 4patriots.com for 10% off- CIA director's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein- Text BROS to 989898 to learn more about Birch Gold Group- Aerosmith farewell tour- Logan beat OzempicSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What do you wish you knew when you were just starting out investing? (00:21) Jason Moser discusses: - Roblox sharing its last batch of monthly metrics - Why the company still has a "glass half-full valuation" - Thoughts for a relatively new investor with decades of investing ahead (16:43) Asit Sharma talks with Bill Burns, CEO of Zebra Technologies, about the business of barcodes and robots in fulfillment centers. Got a question about stocks? Want to tell us about a stock you bought recently? Email podcasts@fool.com Companies discussed: RBLX, ZBRA Host: Chris Hill Guests: Jason Moser, Asit Sharma, Bill Burns Producer: Ricky Mulvey Engineer: Dan Boyd

We finally hit triple digits! To celebrate this epic occasion we called upon past guests, and some of our good friends to roast us no holds barred style! Listener discretion is advised. Remember, if you enjoy our show, we encourage you to leave us a review on your favorite podcast platform, and by doing so we will read your feedback live on air!All our links: https://linktr.ee/69whiskeypodcastThe DaisSupport Delvin and the Delvin Cox Experience: https://thedelvincoxexperience.com/Bill Burns: https://www.instagram.com/ovoutlaw17/Pornstache Podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/6i6vy34k2m8sTKaDP5cXAKKitty Khaos: https://twitter.com/LadyKittyKhaosPo'Boys Podcast: https://pod.link/1215644886The Balldo Join the ballsex revolution now! Your balls will thank you!Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.

This show is sponsored by Noble Gold:Protect Your Retirement W/ A Gold IRA www.GeopoliticsGold.com Noble Gold is Who I Trust ^^^CIA Director, Bill Burns confirmed that China is considering sending lethal aid to Russia in its war against Ukraine in an interview with CBS News on Feb. 24. He then stated, “…however, that China has not yet made a decision on whether to send Russia lethal aid”.Looks like the CIA director is not so sure about his fact. After, does the CIA/US have any credibility? You decide!!For Business inquiries, please go to ➡︎ show@geopoliticsinconflict.com⏰ LIVE STREAM SCHEDULE:Friday 12 noon CT / 10 AM PT / 1PM ET

Face the Nation moderator Margaret Brennan spoke exclusively with CIA Director Bill Burns to discuss the one-year mark of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the latest on China potentially providing lethal military assistance to Russia, and the fallout of the Chinese spy balloon that was shot down weeks ago off the coast of South Carolina. Here's their full conversation.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

EXPERTS FRÉDÉRIC ENCEL Docteur en géopolitique Maître de conférences à Sciences Po Paris et Paris School of Business AZADEH KIAN Sociologue franco-iranienne Auteure de « Femmes et pouvoir en Islam » ARMELLE CHARRIER Éditorialiste en politique internationale - « France 24 » ANTHONY BELLANGER Éditorialiste, spécialiste des questions internationales – « France Inter » Que se passe-t-il en Iran ? L'Agence internationale de l'énergie atomique (AIEA) a détecté dans le pays des particules d'uranium enrichi à 83,7%, soit juste en deçà des 90 % nécessaires pour produire une bombe atomique, selon un dernier rapport de cette instance de l'ONU. Ces particules ont été découvertes dans des échantillons collectés en janvier dans l'usine souterraine de Fordo. "Des clarifications" sont demandées à Téhéran et "les discussions sont toujours en cours" pour déterminer l'origine de ces particules a expliqué l'agence onusienne. L'Iran, qui nie vouloir se doter de l'arme atomique, a fait état la semaine dernière "de fluctuations involontaires" au cours du processus d'enrichissement, dans une lettre citée par l'AIEA. Ces informations surviennent alors que le directeur général de l'AIEA, Rafael Grossi, est attendu en Iran dans les jours à venir, dans un contexte de détérioration des relations. Les négociations afin de ranimer l'accord de Vienne (JCPOA ) conclu en 2015 pour limiter les activités atomiques de l'Iran en échange d'une levée des sanctions internationales sont en effet au point mort. Depuis le retrait des États-Unis de cet accord, décidé en 2018 par le président Donald Trump, la République islamique s'est progressivement affranchie de ses engagements. Au 12 février, son stock total d'uranium enrichi s'élevait ainsi à 3 760,8 kg, soit plus de 18 fois la limite autorisée par l'accord, selon les estimations de l'AIEA. Surtout, l'Iran enrichit à des niveaux toujours plus élevés, loin de la limite fixée à 3,67 %. Hier, le numéro trois du ministère de la Défense américaine, Colin Kahl, a estimé que l'Iran pourrait désormais fabriquer suffisamment de matière fissile pour une bombe nucléaire en "environ 12 jours" lors d'une audience de la Chambre des représentants, en réponse à un parlementaire républicain qui lui demandait pourquoi l'administration Biden avait cherché à relancer l'accord sur le nucléaire iranien. "Parce que les progrès nucléaires de l'Iran depuis que nous avons quitté le JCPOA ont été remarquables. En 2018, lorsque l'administration précédente a décidé de quitter le JCPOA, il aurait fallu environ 12 mois à l'Iran pour produire l'équivalent d'une bombe de matière fissile. Maintenant, il faudrait environ 12 jours", a-t-il expliqué. Le chef de la CIA a lui estimé dimanche que le programme d'enrichissement d'uranium iranien "progresse vite à tel point qu'il leur suffirait de quelques semaines pour atteindre les 90 %, s'ils décidaient de franchir cette ligne". Il s'est également inquiété d'une « dangereuse » escalade dans la coopération militaire entre Téhéran et Moscou. "Ce que nous constatons, ce sont des signes selon lesquels la Russie propose d'aider les Iraniens avec leur programme de missiles et envisage aussi la possibilité de procurer à l'Iran des avions de combat ", a déclaré Bill Burns dans une rare interview diffusée sur la chaîne CBS. Alors jusqu'où ira le régime des mollahs dans la poursuite de son programme nucléaire ? Le pays peut-il se doter bientôt de l'arme nucléaire ? Et après plus de 5 mois, où en est la révolte en Iran ? Le mouvement est-il en train de s'essouffler ? Enfin que va faire Israël ? Le Premier ministre sur le retour, Benyamin Netayahou, qui a formé il y a quelques semaines une alliance électorale avec les ultra-nationalistes extrémistes auparavant en marge de la politique, multiplie les menaces. Lui qui préconise depuis longtemps une action militaire contre l'Iran, l'a de nouveau évoqué lors d'un discours mi-février. "La seule chose qui parvient à arrêter les États voyous qui s'apprêtent à développer la bombe atomique, c'est une menace militaire crédible ou un passage à l'action militaire crédible", a-t-il indiqué lors d'une conférence sur la sécurité nationale. DIFFUSION : du lundi au samedi à 17h45 FORMAT : 65 minutes PRÉSENTATION : Caroline Roux - Axel de Tarlé REDIFFUSION : du lundi au vendredi vers 23h40 RÉALISATION : Nicolas Ferraro, Bruno Piney, Franck Broqua, Alexandre Langeard, Corentin Son, Benoît Lemoine PRODUCTION : France Télévisions / Maximal Productions Retrouvez C DANS L'AIR sur internet & les réseaux : INTERNET : francetv.fr FACEBOOK : https://www.facebook.com/Cdanslairf5 TWITTER : https://twitter.com/cdanslair INSTAGRAM : https://www.instagram.com/cdanslair/

A new year, a new MMH episode! Here we are with our first episode of 2023! joining us is master cosplayer Bill Burns, who recently went viral online for his appearance as Walt Disney at Disneyland, were he shared a very special moment with the mouse in charge himself.... you have to see it! follow Bill on Instagram @billburnzcosplay and don't forget to rate and review our show!

Welcome to The Times of Israel's Daily Briefing, your 15-minute audio update on what's happening in Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world, from Sunday through Thursday. US reporter Jacob Magid and New York reporter Luke Tress join host Jessica Steinberg for today's podcast, with a report from Judah Ari Gross at the earthquake site in Turkey. Gross speaks with a Hadassah doctor serving with the Hatzolah team in Turkey, helping extract earthquake survivors from the devastating wreckage. Magid discusses the across-the-board US push for calm in the region, following the visits of several senior Biden administration officials, including US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and CIA director Bill Burns.  Tress speaks about a recent closed meeting of US congress members with Jewish leaders in New York, and their show of support for Israel and its recent actions.  Magid talks about the start of the Malka Leifer trial in Melbourne, Australia, expected to last six weeks as it uncovers the sexual abuse reportedly committed by Leifer against her students while she served as principal of an ultra-Orthodox girls school in the early 2000s. Discussed articles include: CIA director: Current Israeli-Palestinian tensions resemble Second Intifada Coalition party vows settlement building will continue, despite US request for pause After international pressure, PM delays East Jerusalem razing sought by Ben Gvir US pushing Abbas on plan to boost PA security presence in northern West Bank In now annual tradition, US urges Israel to keep friction in check ahead of Ramadan Skirting concerns over new government, NY lawmakers vow firm support for Israel 13 years after bolting, 6 since arrest, Malka Leifer extradited to Australia Subscribe to The Times of Israel Daily Briefing on iTunes, Spotify, PlayerFM, Google Play, or wherever you get your podcasts. IMAGE: A rescuer walks on a destroyed building in Gaziantep, southeastern Turkey, Thursday, Feb. 9, 2023 (AP Photo/Kamran Jebreili)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Mark Rossi, Matt Levy and special guest Bill Burns discuss a Spielberg classic! Some call it the original summer blockbuster! Listen to find out what makes this film special! Follow us @halloffamepod Email us at thehalloffamepod@gmail.com --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/thehalloffamepod/message

Happy new year, y'all! We're excited to be back for 2023 with a great lineup. This episode we've got two amazing guests talking to us about being healthy, and finding happiness in the new year. First, we check in with the fabulous Ms. Patricia Greenberg AKA The Fitness Gourmet. She's the author of four healthy-eating cookbooks including "Eat Well, Live Well, Age Well," and she's here to talk to us about the importance of staying active as we mature. We talk about how to be healthy beyond just trying to lose weight, we cover some really delicious salad and veggie soup recipes, and we discuss what the heck a microbiome is and why it's so important to stay hydrated as we age.Then we talk about something Papa knows nothing about, but is all too interested in; Cosplay! We talk to Bill Burns, the man y'all probably know as the uncanny Walt Disney cosplayer from his 2022 viral video, where he dressed up as Walt himself and went around the Disney parks bringing joy to everyone around him. We chat about what inspired him to don the Disney garb and go meet Mickey, who filmed the video that has now been viewed millions of times, what cosplay conventions we can go to, and what it was like for Bill to go from an unknown cosplayer to having people cry with joy seeing him as Walt.Thank you to our family of amazing sponsors! Ochsner Hospital for ChildrenRouses MarkersKid's Dream Dress ShopWww.kidsdreamus.comSandpiper VacationsWww.sandpipiervactions.comPinxav Diaper Rash CreamWww.pinxav.com

Today we're talking to Bill Burns, Chief Product & Solutions Officer at Zebra Technologies; and we discuss Bill's journey from sales to CEO; how the on-demand is evolving alongside technology; and why listening to customers first is the key to success. All of this right here, right now, on the Modern CTO Podcast!  Check out more of Bill and Zebra at https://www.zebra.com/us/en.html!

Bill Burns was a career diplomat and pillar of the State Department for decades, rising to Deputy Secretary in Barack Obama's second administration. He's been ambassador to Russia and was instrumental in setting up the Iran nuclear deal. For much of the last two years, he's served as director of the CIA. Judy Woodruff sat down with Burns at the CIA headquarters for a rare interview. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

①Addressing the G20 Summit, Chinese President Xi Jinping warned against politicizing food and energy issues. We discuss why using food and energy security as weapons end up hurting everyone. (00:55) ②We take a look at Xi Jinping's bilateral talks with world leaders on the sidelines of the G20 summit. (12:52) ③In the first known in-person meeting between senior officials of the US and Russia since the Russia-Ukraine conflict began, CIA director Bill Burns warned Russia against using nuclear weapons. Why has the US initiated this meeting? (24:25) ④Official data show China's economy continued its mixed recovery in October. (33:42) ⑤The world population has reached 8 billion, and it is growing older. Are we ready for population aging? (42:47)

The summer Disney + TV Series Obi Wan Kenobi is the topic of the week. Mark, Matt and special guest Bill Burns tackle the Star Wars series. Then as always, listen for a few side conversations about Matrix 4 and other titles. Follow our Instagram @halloffamepod Email us at thehalloffamepod@gmail.com

On this debut episode of The Langley Files, CIA Director Bill Burns joins our hosts, Dee and Walter, to dispel some common misconceptions about the CIA, provide insights into the character and skills of the Agency's workforce, and share some personal anecdotes about what it means to him to lead the world's premiere foreign intelligence organization.

Bill Burns from Zebra Technologies defines what the on-demand economy is and what it takes to be a successful business and leader in it. We also discuss why reacting faster in an on-demand environment is no longer good enough and how leaders in major industries – like retail, logistics/warehousing, and healthcare – can plan better for what's coming next. Finally, we explore what emerging technologies or techniques organizations can use to have a more accurate picture of what's happening in their business and move forward with innovation strategies and digital transformation initiatives. About Bill Burns Bill Burns joined Zebra in 2015 and today leads the product & solutions group. In his role, Mr. Burns oversees product and solutions strategy, investments, and development operations for the company's expansive technology portfolio which includes mobile computing, specialty printers, data capture solutions, location solutions, and intelligent edge solutions. Mr. Burns is also responsible for the chief technology office - focused on emerging technologies and solution incubation. Mr. Burns has more than 25 years of experience in the high-tech sector. Before joining Zebra, he served as chief executive officer of Embrane, a Silicon Valley-based venture capital-backed startup Cisco acquired in April 2015. Before joining Embrane, Mr. Burns served as chief executive officer of Spirent Communications, a global leader in test and measurement solutions publicly traded on the London Stock Exchange. He has also held various executive and sales leadership roles at Tellabs, Inc., now Coriant.

Founded in Wakefield, West Yorkshire UK in 1972 by singer/guitarist Bill Nelson, Be-Bop Deluxe were a band that combined art-rock, glam and prog with a healthy dose of heavy metal guitar heroics. OG BBD fan Bill Burns joins us as we unpack their sonically stunning 1976 album, 'Sunburst Finish'. Songs featured in this episode: Anemone - The Brian Jonestown Massacre; Stay Young - Bill Nelson's Red Noise; Sickle Clowns - The Pretty Things; Axe Victim - Be-Bop Deluxe; Matte Kudasai - King Crimson; Good Times Roll - The Cars; Wah-Wah Galaxy No. 1 - Bill Nelson; Fair Exchange - Be-Bop Deluxe; At Night In Dreams - White Denim; Heavenly Homes, Ships In The Night - Be-Bop Deluxe; Watch That Man - David Bowie; Crying To The Sky - Be-Bop Deluxe; Apache - The Shadows; Sleep That Burns - Be-Bop Deluxe; Strawberry Fields Forever - The Beatles; Maid In Heaven, Beauty Secrets, Life In The Air Age, Like An Old Blues - Be-Bop Deluxe; Hercules - Elton John; Crystal Gazing - Be-Bop Deluxe; Penny Lane - The Beatles; Silly Love Songs - Paul McCartney and Wings; Baby's On Fire, 2/1 (Music For Airports) - Brian Eno; The Day My Baby Gave Me A Surprise - DEVO; Blazing Apostles - Be-Bop Deluxe; Great White Buffalo - Ted Nugent; Blazing Apostles - Be-Bop Deluxe (Live, Grand Theatre, Leeds 14 Feb 1977)

This week, we review CIA Director Bill Burns' track record so far.

Who is current CIA Director William J. Burns? Not a soldier, nor a lawyer, nor a long-time intelligence officer. Instead of the usual suspects for the role, Bill Burns is a legacy civil servant and a career diplomat. Under his direction, the CIA seems to be trying a few new things, like being transparent (or is he?!) and meeting face-to-face with world leaders instead of trying to overthrow them from behind a desk in DC. We decided to take a quick look at this Bill Burns character to see where he came from and what he's done to become trusted with America's Premier Intelligence Agency™. In part one, we discuss his upbringing, his education, and his career as an ambassador, as well as his role in facilitating the now-lifeless Iran nuclear deal. We also discuss the concept of the "Deep State" and what that actually looks like, as opposed to how it's portrayed by certain politicians who like to complain a lot and who don't like the concept of "Checks and Balances." https://www.businessinsider.com/what-deep-state-is-and-why-trump-gets-it-wrong-2020-1?op=1 https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/cumberlink/name/william-burns-obituary?pid=199107880 https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ei/biog/105574.htm https://history.state.gov/departmenthistory/people/burns-william-joseph https://eunacr.com/2021/03/20/who-is-william-j-burns-the-new-director-of-the-cia/ https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-iran-nuclear-deal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nunn%E2%80%93Lugar_Cooperative_Threat_Reduction

Mark Rossi, Matt Levy, and special guest Bill Burns regroup to discuss the Disney+ Marvel Series Moonknight! Listen to their thoughts and feelings on the 2022 series! Follow us @halloffamepod Email us at thehalloffamepod@gmail.com

Vikings LB Za'Darius Smith tells Rich why he's super hyped to be back on the field after missing nearly all of last season, why he's grateful for the Packers giving him a shot to shine and is looking forward to facing his old team and Aaron Rodgers, and reveals how he made the transition from 6'3” basketball center to Pro Bowl NFL linebacker.  Rich and the guys marvel at how long TJ stuck by his ancient iPhone 6 before finally upgrading recently. Now that the dust has settled on NFL free agency and the draft, Rich lists his Top 5 Under-the-Radar Offseason Acquisitions including Myles Jack to the Steelers, Rodgers Saffold to the Bills, Jabril Peppers to the Patriots, Russell Gage to the Buccaneers and the Dolphins adding Raheem Mostert and Cedrick Wilson.  Zebra Technologies exec Bill Burns tells Rich if the NFL is close to being able to electronically determine first downs and TDs using chips inside of footballs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

MEMBERS - Check the ad-free page for a bonus segment! The incredible discovery in March 2022 of Ernest Shackleton's Endurance on the Antarctic sea floor leads to a discussion about the exciting future of underwater archaeology in CRM. Underwater archaeologist, Bill Burns, joins us to shed light on the incredible recent discovery of the Endurance and how it was made possible by new technology, archival research and the skillful navigation skills of Shackleton's crew. Bill also shares his path and experiences of working as an underwater archaeologist in CRM and how, although it is highly specialized, the subdiscipline is finding a growing market in CRM. In the members only segment, Andrew and Bill “nerd out” on SCUBA technology and methods. If you aren't a member but are a SCUBA enthusiast or just curious, the bonus segment is definitely worth the price of admission! Interested in learning about how to use X-Rays and similar technology in archaeology? Check out the linked PaleoImaging course from James Elliot! Connect with James on Twitter: @paleoimaging Interested in sponsoring this show or podcast ads for your business? Zencastr makes it really easy! Click this message for more info. Start your own podcast with Zencastr and get 30% off your first three months with code CRMARCH. Click this message for more information. For rough transcripts of this episode go to www.archpodnet.com/crmarchpodcast/239 Links Falkland Maritime Heritage Trust Endurance 22 website Saab Sabertooth product page Informational website about Ernest Shackleton, maintained by the Shackleton family Shackleton's ship Endurance discovered after more than 100 years at the bottom of the sea (Youtube) Endurance: Shackleton's lost ship is found in Antarctic (BBC) 106 Years, 4 Weeks, 1 Wreck: How Shackleton's Ship Was Found Follow Our Panelists On Twitter Bill @succinctbill; Doug @openaccessarch; Stephen @processarch; Andrew @AndrewKinkella, Chris W @Archeowebby, @DIGTECHLLC, and @ArchPodNet Blogs and Resources: Bill White: Succinct Research Doug Rocks-MacQueen: Doug's Archaeology Stephen Wagner: Process - Opinions on Doing Archaeology Chris Webster: Random Acts of Science Andrew Kinkella Kinkella Teaches Archaeology (Youtube) Blog: Kinkella Teaches Archaeology ArchPodNet APN Website: https://www.archpodnet.com APN on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/archpodnet APN on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/archpodnet APN on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/archpodnet Tee Public Store Affiliates Wildnote TeePublic Timeular Motion

CIA director Bill Burns has delivered a sobering assessment of Vladimir Putin's mood, saying the Russian President is angry & frustrated and is likely to double down with no regard for civilian casualties". Putin has "no sustainable political endgame, Mr Burns concluded. Today's Nick Robinson asked Putin loyalist Maria Butina. She is a member of the State Duma who is making social media propaganda videos backing the war. She was jailed in the United States for conspiring to infiltrate political organizations including the National Rifle Association (Photo credit: European Photopress Agency)

“All these guys who they said are conspiracy theorists…have all been proved right,” Kassam said. “It's all happening. They are arresting Christian preachers on the streets of Western nations.” Our guests are: Bernie Kerik, Frank Gaffney, Sam Faddis Stay ahead of the censors - Join us warroom.org/join Aired On: 05/10/2021 Watch: On the Web: http://www.warroomorg.wpengine.com On Podcast: http://warroom.ctcin.bio On TV: PlutoTV Channel 240, Dish Channel 219, Roku, Apple TV, FireTV or on https://AmericasVoice.news. #news #politics #realnews