Why Trump's War Is Only About Himself: Wolff

Jackson Hewitt has a great tax prep deal, $149 or less.

Missing out is like ignoring the check engine light in your car.

You regret it.

Seriously, the price is only $149 or less, no matter how complicated.

So don't wait.

Like when you get a password expired today alert or you're shopping online and there's

only one item left, it's like your taxes are in the cart, just complete the purchase.

Hurry, this deal for $149 or less is like your phone at 1%.

It's about to power down.

Limited time offer for new clients on federal returns participating locations only

in terms of Jackson Hewitt.com.

Slash 149.

Iran is a country, it's a deeply, it's a deeply factional situation.

What is the result of what he's saying?

The result is, I don't know, chaos, anarchy, civil war.

We don't know what our goals, the goals of the United States are.

We don't know what the goals, the personal goals of Donald Trump are.

We don't know what the goals of the Iranian people are.

He likes the fact that that war gives him a platform.

Nobody talks about anything else.

It is, of course, the wag the dog scenario.

You go to war, it's war.

And who is at the center of war, Donald Trump, the man waging the war.

Michael.

Joanna.

Oh, that's good.

You remember my name because on our last podcast, I could see you gropeing for it.

You didn't have to see, I think I acknowledged.

I completely forgot in your name, but I've practiced.

OK, so Marco Rubio wakes up this morning to possibly an entirely new job taking over Iran

as we are recording this, which is Saturday morning, is really television and radio.

Possibly.

But I wouldn't jump that conclusion because I literally think nobody knows, this is not

even the fog of war.

We've gone into the black hole of war.

But in the back, all I would say is that Israeli radio and television are reporting that

the leader of Iran has been killed in a nest, right?

Right.

But what we saw reporting last week is that the Iranians had anticipated this and had set

up a hierarchical structure that would replace anyone in the leadership who was killed immediately

replace them, that their entire goal was the survival of the regime.

Right.

So they had succession planning in place where anything to happen to him.

All right.

So let's just real back a moment for people who haven't joined us before and don't care

if either of us can remember each other's names.

I'm Joanna Coles, your Michael Wolf.

And where are we going?

We are going inside Trump's head and we are doing this as an act of political analysis

and analysis that nobody else does and for that reason, we believe everybody gets most

things wrong.

But nothing else matters and let's emphasize this literally nothing else matters except

what comes into Trump's head by some ridiculously long held opinion he's had, something that

he's woken up with, something that the last person he spoke to has told him for from whatever

sources and by whatever measure and by whatever, by whatever truthfulness.

What happens in the United States, what happens in the world as we're seeing happens because

it has set off something in his mind and he goes, yeah, yeah, let's do that.

This is and the entire administration conforms to this because all anybody in the White House

is interested in is what's in Trump's head and actually a lot of things happen because

they try to anticipate what's in Trump's head.

But this is, as we have pointed out, so many times in which so many people get wrong,

a government of one.

A government of one, a country of one at the moment, a world of one and it's Trump himself

says about himself, he has, he doesn't drink but he has an alcoholics personality, meaning as

anybody who knows an alcoholic or has had to deal with an alcoholic over any length of time,

knows what you're actually dealing with is extreme unpredictability.

So even as you say his administration is trying to play and anticipate what's going on inside

his head, that's a sycophian task because nobody knows, including him much of the time.

And also he's been asked, he's been asked on a number of occasions, actually I have asked him

this question, who do you trust, who do you consult, who do you take advice from?

And then he looks at you and I can see this now vividly, this kind of expression and it's an

expression of what a strange question to ask me. And then his answer is me, I only trust myself,

I only take advice from myself, I am the person, I consult about all major decisions.

And also he sometimes says that he just goes with his gut, that he has great instincts and we

know what's in his gut, his lifetime supply of fast food, of chicken fillet or whatever those

sandwiches are, of quarter pounders, of big max, of coke, diet coke, that he has a button on

the resolute desk that he presses, a story that you broke to bring in more sugar. So we are at

the mercy of Trump's gut. I would say that the other thing in his gut is just an incredible

survival instinct. He does, he does what he needs to do to gain another day. So which brings us

too. Right. Has he gained another day and why now? Is, is why now because there's intelligence of

where Hameini was going to be and that's why they moved? Or is there a bigger political reason why

now given what's going on? No, I think that's a mistake to assume that there's a bigger political

reason. The reason always has to come back to what's in Trump's head. And I think that there are

there are two things that were in Trump's head. First thing, for whatever, for a combination of

reasons, he found himself with this incredible U.S. Armada ready to attack Iran. So he couldn't,

what could they do? Go home. Could he throw up his hands and say, oh yeah, okay, no, no, we're

going home. No, he had to do something. Then he made these gestures about a limited attack. And we

still don't know if this is actually a massive attack or this is is Trump's this this limited

attack because what the other thing in his head overriding everything is how do I declare victory?

So that is it. I have to whatever I can do, I got to get out of this thing. I have to be able to

declare victory. So and the premise that he set up here from a from a tactical standpoint is

problematic, which is I'm only going to bomb. I'm not going to send in ground troops. It is very

hard to affect regime change if you don't do that. If you don't actually go in and hold the capital

and hold and hold the television stations and hold the military and their barracks and all

doing doing all of that. So if you are only bombing the question is how much can you change? And

that's not necessarily a question for for him because I don't really think it is it doesn't

it isn't really a question of of how much of what we have to do these are our goals.

The goal is what is the scenario in which I get to claim victory?

Over the years I began to notice an interesting trend. A lot of guys have told me about how as

they age they feel slower, more sluggish. But Mars Ben says they're here to help.

Designed to help boost your body's natural testosterone levels. Marsmen use eight natural

clinically dozed ingredients like zinc, boron and vitamin D. Some men reports steady or energy

not like drinking a cup of coffee but a more consistent boost throughout the day according to

Marsmen. For a limited time our listeners get 50% off for life plus free shipping and three free

gifts at mengo2mars.com. It's a perfect way to get yourself in gear. That's mengo2mars.com

for 50% off in three free gifts at checkout. After you're purchased they'll ask you where you heard

about them. Please support our show and tell them our show sent you.

We should play from his speech the speech where he announces that he's going to be bombing

Iran or we as America is going to be bombing Iran. We should play the speech where he calls upon

the Iranian people to rise up because it's an interesting direct appeal to them. It's the

opposite of what obviously George W. Bush did with their whole idea for regime change and

putting in an American administration. This is about him appealing directly to the Iranians who

were protesting last month and who he said help was on the way to. Let's just hear specifically what

he said. To the great proud people of Iran I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand

stay sheltered don't leave your home it's very dangerous outside bombs will be dropping everywhere

when we are finished take over your government it will be yours to take this will be probably your

only chance for generations. For many years you have asked for America's help but you never got

it. No president was willing to do what I am willing to do tonight. Now you have a president who

is giving you what you want. So let's see how you respond. America is backing you with overwhelming

strength and devastating force. Now is the time to seize control of your destiny and to unleash

the prosperous and glorious future that is close within your reach. This is the moment for action.

Do not let it pass. Thoughts. Oh well I mean the problem here is the pronoun. You who is you.

I mean you know Iran is a country it's a deeply it's a deeply factional situation. So what is he

saying is he saying well he's not saying anything is the point but what is the result of what he's

saying. The result is I don't know chaos. Anarchy. A civil war a situation even more precarious

and unpredictable than the current situation. So so we don't know so this is back to this black hole

thing. We don't know what our goals the goals of the United States are we don't know what the

goals the personal goals of Donald Trump are we don't know what the goals of the Iranian people

are. I don't know it's it's well we know enough that there are a lot of Iranian people who are

protesting against a really dominant violent unpleasant regime. We know that Iran has been a

problem in the Middle East for some time. We know that it's been a headache for America for many

years. I thought that there's another part in the speech which we should refer to where he basically

gives a potted history of Iran. It's as almost as if he's giving it to himself as much as to anybody

else but reminding people of the American hostages which is such a boomer moment. It's probably

perhaps the the moment most seared on boomers memories in terms of foreign policy.

Jimmy Carter tried to release them absolute disaster. Reagan swings into power and immediately

they're released and I wonder if that's at the back of Donald Trump's head too.

Yeah I mean I don't know I doubt yes there's always a mishmash of factual semi-factual

and historical references that he doesn't quite understand and that he is skimmed over.

I'm sure someone's given him a deep briefing document and he's just kind of enough with that.

Yes and I think that I've mentioned before I just I just recently read this extraordinary book

King of Kings about the Iranian Revolution and but I am sure that Donald Trump did not read that book

but everyone else should because it really sets the stage for for an understanding that that

Iran has been probably the single most pivotal field of contention foreign contention

from the last several generations and everything comes comes out of that and

that we have gotten this wrong so many times and it's such in the end an incredibly complicated

situation of which Donald Trump is not going to want to deal with does not want to deal with is

not going to deal with and the thesis being that we will that we will use this this overwhelming

what what may be this overwhelming example of shock and awe to destabilize the situation and

then claim victory. Well as as we're talking Iranian television is now saying that Hamani is alive

as far as I know and he's likely to give us speech so well yes I guess that would indicate

if he gives the speech and that's it was pre-regarded yes and that's it was pre-regarded

just to mess with people so really the fog of war truth is we have no idea what's going on

and and the thing is you know I again and I was we we we spoke about this this the other day when

someone in the in the the the median last week in the situation room is that Trump kept repeating

that he wanted to do what we did in Venezuela and and and so far I think we're we're we're on we're

on script for that and then let's see and then we're going to see in the next number of hours days

how far off script we go and we can go really grievously off script we can and also we I mean as

you say the normal metrics for success on something like this really don't apply because it's

about what does Donald Trump want out of this and will he get it and how does he in again what he

wants out of this is never like other people other other presidents set somewhat some at least in

some sense particular goals out of this but the goal of I just want a victory is um

yeah it's an entirely other way of looking at at foreign policy but in a foreign policy agenda

right and he hasn't had a victory trying to resolve what we said on Thursday is actually one of

the biggest issues globally Ukraine and Russia he said he was going to resolve it he hasn't

resolved it in fact there was a story that you and I talked about earlier in the spectator about

UK intelligence and Western Europe intelligence intersecting calls of Russian intelligence

including lots of people close to Putin laughing at how Putin has been playing Donald Trump

well I think it's complete bullshit and and if it comes out of the British press it's probably made

up so it's the way of truth about it I mean why do I think it has the ring of truth about it it's

certainly true that every time they have it I mean this has done nothing I mean Putin I mean I know

that that line of reasoning of that that that that Trump is a laptop to Putin but it actually

hasn't played out I mean Ukraine he hasn't resolved Ukraine that's definitely true

but that is still an incredible problem for for and and probably to some degree unreported for

Russia that they are running out of manpower they are the economy is is really finally teedering

on the on the on the verge over over Ukraine they're not making you know the progress that they

make in their war and they're they're making yes somewhat prog but it is so incremental at such a

cost I mean we're talking about in in Ukraine you know what I don't know 1.2 1.4 million casualties

at this at this point this is an unmitigated disaster for Vladimir Putin and I think it very well

could be could result in the end of the guy so I'm I'm not sure that that that Trump

people have been saying that for the last two years about Putin well he could have been saying

that the last two years but this is this is you know a war of attrition takes a very long time

and then it's really about who can stand at the longest and so between the Ukrainians and the

Russians I don't know it continues on I mean Trump has has while he has threatened the Ukrainians

and this that the other things linsky and the oval office we are still basically delivering the

weaponry and the and the support to to Ukraine for them to continue to push on in this war I mean

if if the Russians are laughing at Trump over this and there are many things to laugh at Trump about

um I I would say that they are out of touch with reality about what they themselves are facing

all right so how does the Iranian bombing play with the macabase

well I think I think it doesn't play um well I think everybody they're all going to be

skeptical about that I think Trump gets a relative pass if he gets out of there very quickly

declares victory um if this gets bogged down if American lives start to be lost it'll be a

catastrophe I mean you heard him in his speech say it's possible there might be a loss of American

lives I did but that's different from there actually being American lives lost so we'll we'll see

what um you know and I think probably he's somewhat worried you know I mean we know what what

what some of what the generals have said that this is uh this could be a very very complicated

situation and it could be um it could put lots of American lives at risk um he's obviously bedding

let's do it like we did in Venezuela um you know you can get out you know and he has this idea

now we can bomb bomb um and that that is you know that's an old right wing idea that bombs can solve

everything bomb them back into the stone age um and um uh uh and and I'm sure that that is you

know that's that's what he's hoping for right right now that that 10 days from now we're out of

there and he's and he's claiming victory no no boots on the ground we just have left a lot of

smoldering ruins and um and then uh wiped our our hands of the problem and we've obliterated

the nuclear sites that we thought we've literated last so double obliteration

double obliteration yes but I mean but this could it could be a catastrophe for him

or it could be a victory I mean as you're always saying he has feral instincts for seizing

but it could be the cause of victory and the victory it could be the claim of a victory I don't think

it can be a victory unless we we we went in and occupied the country which we're clearly not

going to do all right so Pete Hegseth learning from perhaps his boss uh his boss is all or nothing

attitude to deal making um sent a memo Friday at five o'clock saying that's it was stopping

using anthropic AI which the military uh and their national security forces have been using

for the last year I think it was the first AI I AI company to really help with national

security uh anthropics CEO said that they felt that the military wanted to use them

for reasons that didn't feel good to them well actually back up because they were really

negotiating this this um this out and there were and there were basically two issues that the

company had to kind of kind of beyond which we can't go points which is the use of the um of

this AI software to to um to spy on Americans right max observation um number one and a number

two the use of this this software in autonomous weaponry in other words weaponry that was not

supervised by a human being by gray bolts so so that was there um uh there we we can't we can't

cross that line now that's an interesting it this this then became this interesting kind of dispute

because actually that's what the law says the law says you can't use use um uh AI to spy on

Americans um I mean you you you can't spy there there's a a body of law about spying on Americans

which would which would be um which would preclude the use of AI for that and um and and also

that's that's the law relates to weaponry too you have to have a human interface there so it was

unclear what they were what the fight was about um except that I mean was it a fight about cultures

about the insistence that AI companies control how their products is used well yes theoretically

but but to what point and I think the point you sort of have to read into into this that yes that's

what the law says but the Trump administration doesn't always follow the law uh the Trump administration

is the law remember that giant thing they've just unfurled outside the DOJ right so that was so

so so the the um the anthropic position was you know yeah we're willing to function within

within the law now now now curiously then the Hegsitz said no you have to that you're the only

restrictions on on this software have to be the the restrictions that already exist in the law

but those restrictions already did exist in the law so this is this was incredibly hard to understand

exactly what the stakes are and exactly what the um um uh what each side actually wanted now

I mean I think you have to then ask this broader question and it's obviously the very pressing question

is is um is who's in charge of this AI stuff um on a on a you know not on a corporate level and not

uh uh not necessarily I'm not on a defense department level but what are the political choices

that we have made about this what is the social agreement in terms of AI and so we're suddenly

left in this situation in which in which this is being fought out by you know frankly two bad actors

who who would you want to determine the future of the future really um the Trump administration

or Silicon Valley these are both people we we I think in a in a um they're uh that we have no

reason to trust and I don't think anybody does trust them well and clearly both of them are

looking to make enormous gobs of money from this too I mean I read a figure that 50 billion dollars

venture capital that has gone into the American military and providing AI and also

in the whole American military in the last yeah what on what happens to um uh to AI but and then

it's this interest I mean there's this whole drama that has played out of course with the with

the tech people bonding I mean the tech people who used to hate the Trump people then bonded with

the Trump people um precisely because they could they can so that they could influence the regulations

which would or or influence the Trump administration to to impose a lack of regulation

right so they all went up I mean David sat right David sat sitting at the top of it uh and

then of course the irony of a meal Michael uh who's within the Trump organization now and was

frantically tweeting out anti-anthropic tweets saying that Dario emoji who's the CEO and co-founder

of anthropic was behaving like a tech god and of course that's exactly what a meal Michael was

accused of when he was a uber with Travis County let me do my my a meal Michael's story so I go I have

an a meal Michael's story um um uh mine mine mine mine mine has actually been dramatized uh so

okay um so I went to a dinner for uber and I think this was in 2015 um and um um um

um and I was invited just because I was a journalist to go to a when one of these yeah they have

these of the records sort of interesting dinners I've been to a couple of yeah they're not

necessarily too interesting but um uh once I've been to have been fun but I've had different

leadership so we have different standards also in terms of very possibly very fun um and this

this actually turned out for many people to be to be um I don't know fun but fireworks and um but

I brought uh another journalist to this dinner Ben Smith who was then actually running Buzzfeed

news he's gone on to several um significantly greater positions since since then and um he was

he was in fact sitting down at one end of the table and I was sitting down at the other end of

the table but he was sitting with him with uh with um with michaels and um and I saw him I mean I saw

their heads together I thought oh god you know these guys are not going to be stupid enough to um

to engage with Ben yes and um but they did he's a very shrewd journalist they did and what a meal

michaels who was drunk at the time uh started to go on about journalists I mean this is a dinner

for journalists um he started to go on about the about journalists how much he hated them

and how much he wanted to investigate them and how much he wanted to mount a counter offensive

against journalists blah blah blah blah blah blah blah um which Ben then promptly reported and um

I think I think um and michaels lost his job over that and then we were all um uh I don't think

that's why michaels lost his job michaels lost his job over all the accusations of toxic masculinity

at uber um which started with an accusation by uber employees that they taken him to a karaoke bar

and soul this did not help um a meal michaels career in the tech business um and in fact then we were

all um uh we we were the uber series I can't remember the name of it it was pretty good though

we were all then um scripted and um played by actors in it and I was played by an actor who was

significantly fatter than I am um oh that's so annoying that couldn't be more irritating to be

represented by someone who's bigger than you yes absolutely unacceptable um no and actually

Ben is fatter than I was and he got a thin actor anyway um super annoying but a meal michaels so

that's another another interesting thing what that it would that it kind of seems like a lot of

failed silicon valley guys have um have washed up in the trump administration this is where

silicon valley guys go to die yeah and I think it's probably fair to say that a meal who's an

incredibly smart operator um and was very successful at uber until he wasn't and until the culture

was completely out of control but nevertheless he was a very successful operator and look how

incredibly important uber is to our lives I should point out they actually sponsor an event

that the the beast says but that's not why I'm saying this I mean it's just become an incredible

utility um but the culture that he and Travis oversaw was so toxic that in the end the staff ended

up rejecting the founders and they both left no and and they actually had the uber culture um was

a kind of a prequel to the trump culture in lots of ways yeah absolutely bro culture no boundaries

toxic masculinity and all sorts of accusations of sexual assault not I'm saying by a meal or by

Travis but by drivers that they then hid uh and in fact it was one of I mean it was a junior

employee and uh who posted a blog having tried to raise all sorts of concerns within the company

structure and with the company HR and they ignored a Susan Fowler who went on to bring the founders

of the company down all of this this whole tech culture obviously is um is germane to so many

things now in influences so much including the trump administration um but also so the the

other sub plot in this anthropic dispute has been that that Sam Altman um who's the CEO of open AI

came in well first he announced his solidarity with anthropic of course and then and then went

around and made a deal with the defense department so this is all we have all of this going

there are bad actors everywhere in this well and also it's interesting to what extent can you

as a company and I think this is where the culture comes in uh tell the government and in

particularly the pentagon how you can use their software I mean obviously you want to stay

within the grounds of the law but you know what if a a fashion company sells the uniforms to the

military and then says well you've got to wear them with the cuffs up and you've got to do that

but that's but that's but that's ridiculous Joanna and that's not the not the I'm just bringing

it a fashion analogy it doesn't really mean anything to this so in this situation and and it is

relevant you're making software for um uh that that has that has uses across the spectrum of

contemporary life and you don't know and if you're the software designer um you have some agency

here if somebody came to you and said design this but it might be used to spy on Americans

well then you might have say no I'm not I'm not going to do this well and Google have been through

this right Google went through exactly the same thing that staff complained and you do and you

should have the right to say what your software can can and cannot do I have the right to sell my

soft not sell my software to the government which is effectively what anthropic is doing doing

right now I mean it's another situation then you if you do we're selling it to the government

and we're going to go into a deal you know all software licenses are complicated documents

and um and they're always always saying what you can and cannot do with it so and and when a private

company enters into an agreement with the government there are those same negotiations take take

place and you know if if it if it works for you as a private company um the agreement that's fine

but if it doesn't or if in this case it appears that the government is then trying to trying to

change that agreement well yeah then you can you can um go home why not it's your it's your um it's

your software right and this is not a battle they have in China in China the companies just give it

over and the government does what it wants it it's a fascinating discussion about whether or not if

you sell your software to the US or to the Pentagon they should be allowed to decide what they do with

I mean within the bounds of the law obviously and this is part of a much broader discussion

about the constraints that should be placed on on artificial intelligence I mean a discussion

which we've seen by the way rather incapable of having in any kind of kind of structured way

well anybody's incapable of having it at the moment because it's so complicated and also there's

the battle to beat China which seems to overhang and justify any overreach by AI

meanwhile every day we all receive texts from people saying oh my god have you tried this

it's changed my life you must use this it's changed my life blah blah blah the other aspect of this

is that um is that anthropic is is put in a position to having a negotiate with Pete Higgsif

um and and I think it goes to this another problem within the Trump administration of no one

trusts them no one should trust them um you know you don't know and and and totally they're

incompetent so it's probably very difficult to have a um to have a a reasonable negotiation with

them yeah I'm sure Pete Higgsif having run to veterans organizations extremely badly

uh is not the person you want to discuss and presumably a lot of the lawyers that would have helped

him in the Pentagon have have left uh but then Sam Altman comes in and makes a um makes the deal

yes um makes the deal for open AI um so let's let's um touch on what what I think is in an

extraordinary issue now becoming that it may become the the central issue of our time which is

the Trump administration's efforts to um uh it's sort of their acknowledgement that they can't

win on a um on on a political basis um so that they're now trying to win this would be the

the midterms by altering the fundamental terms of how elections are run obviously obviously

in their favor um and um um you know and this is basically to take over um to take over elections

which are been run by states in in the past by the constitution gives gives gives the states

that power to run run and oversee their own elections but it's in and I've been I've been following

this and listening to this and and it says though we we know they don't have a political strategy

but they do now have what you might call in the and a piss an epistemological strategy which is

this this interesting thing that they're saying the the the the argument is is well don't you think

that um that um that anyone that only American citizens should be able to vote and of course

the answer to that is well yeah yeah um because because that's the law of course um and but but

then the practice becomes well why can't everyone then show proof of citizenship when they do show

up to vote which suddenly means that first thing it's it's not so evident how you show proof of

citizenship um actually a relatively small percentage of people in America or kind of surprisingly

small percentage I have passports which is which would be the definitive proof of of citizenship um

so that that that practice and and let's let's remember that no one has said this is a that this

is a serious or any sort of problem in elections to date that non citizens are showing up to vote

so but then you create a situation in which it's very hard to prove citizenship so you create

a situation in which is fundamentally chaotic and fundamentally then offers the federal government

infinitely more opportunities to interfere in the election process i.e in a way that would be in

favor to the Trump administration right and we saw the we saw him in particular laying this out

and presenting the democrats as cheating as having cheated at the election he kept using the word

cheating i interviewed governor more a healy the governor of massachusetts last last week and i

urge people to watch it if you want to see a sane uh technocratic get things done democrat uh

she really laid out the case but she said how how nervous a lot of democratic governors are and

they're having to take action um and lay out plans for if the national guard for example is sent

in to start patrolling polling stations and how they're all beginning to think that the democratic

governors are getting together to think about how do we counter this because this is very seriously

a threat and as you say trump himself is very conscious he's unlikely to win the midterms that might

mean impeachment for him it might mean worse for him it's possible they could lose the senate

so the only thing that he has at this point is the ability to so distrust and concern around the

validity of the elections and we saw talsy gabbard go down to forten county in georgia and pull out

all sorts of remnants and votes from the 2020 election that he lost obviously to Joe Biden

and you know trump called the the FBI workers who are there doing that raid again just something

that breaks all norms that the president would call FBI agents and encourage them in the work they're

doing now if the midterms are existential for trump and they and they will they may be um what does

a survivalist do and the answer is he does anything that he has to do to survive

well and he may be facing the prospect of jail too as he keeps saying and you you know brilliantly

titled your last your last book about trump all or nothing and you know just to take it back to

Epstein again this extraordinary friendship between two men one of whom ends up swinging his legs

from the chair behind the resolute desk at the white house and the other ends up dead in a jail

in Manhattan and that sort of spectrum of possibility i'm sure haunts trump in as much as anything

i think we could call that existential so to what extent do you think he's paying attention to

the Epstein files at the moment i mean it is the story that won't go away so he's been very good

at changing the subject remember two weeks ago we were talking about minnesota minnesota is just

completely i think i think probably less than we would think um you know he he's i mean i first

thing i i think he's pretty good at compartmentalizing these things and pretty good at understanding

that that this turns the page on that so right now among the other things i mean i mean you know

i'm not sure that he really wanted to find himself in in a war with aron um and and and i think

that was a set of dominoes that that he might he might walk back if he could but the advantage of

that is of course that is that that is the headline now um and um and he is at the center of it

so again you know the thing about the war thing which i think freaks the mega people out

is that it turns out that he likes the posturing of this i mean he likes the fact that though that war

gives him a platform nobody talks about anything else it is one of those things what can change

the subject i mean the ultimate it is of course the wag the wag the dog scenario you go to war

it's war um and who is at the center of war donald trump the man waging the war

who last week was launching his board of peace and half the people that he invited to

subscribe large subscription fears we know he started off with a billion dollars entry fee for

his board of peace that's going to be the most influential board of peace ever and the biggest

global the biggest global most important just rivaling everything of course he invites uh uh

a rum bunch of world leaders to join him in dc and then promptly starts a war less than a week

later starts war as if he's become bored of the board of forces well on this of course this will

become what's happening in a ryan will become making peace there i've made peace and so he's

solved another war there will be ten here it be ten wars but you couldn't help feeling for the

heads of the middle eastern countries who'd come and i'm sure have paid hands from me to join

will be early founding members of the board of peace um that their countries are now receiving

incoming from iran so let's do another victory here okay i knew what you were going to say

knew you were coming to this because this is an interesting victory the so trumps enemy his enemy

since since he began his political career has been in perhaps his central enemy in a way

has been cnn and now um so uh uh uh two days ago three days ago um this day i think

cnn will be taken over by a company that basically exists because of trump's support which is this

which is to say that um that skydance uh which took over paramount and skydance is controlled by

the elison family trump supporters um they were able to take over paramount partly with trump

support and now they are taking over warner brothers discovery which includes cnn in a remarkable

deal we should add for david zazloff the ceo of warner brothers who wrote an extensive profile

about last year but who took miraculously the stock up from seven dollars to thirty one dollars

just playing this deal out and we know that netflix uh looked like they'd locked in the deal

ted sarandas was very excited he'd gone to the white house it looked like it was a done deal

and then paramount launched a hostile takeover and then this week up to their offer which

really meant that netflix walks away now let me let me look at this in a slightly different way

david zazloff yes comes out as the as the um as the true winner in this deal but i think that there's

a way and you look at it that the only way you win in the media business is to get out of it is to

sell out of it and so and so we're looking at so netflix lost this deal but i think

there's a way to i'm a very logical way to see that um um that netflix and especially they by

forcing this a higher and higher price for paramount to pay has led paramount to the slaughterhouse

um i mean there's such a theory that they're actually thrilled about this because this means paramount

is going to spend the next few years paying down an enormous amount of debt for this deal

i'm trying to incorporate the culture if you look at every one of these media deals and i used

to be in the business of looking at these media deals these major media conglomerations they're

all a failure everybody everybody goes down the drain everybody um or the only hope as in the

days david zazloff case is that you can far bit off on on on somebody on somebody it's literally

past the past you remember when somebody you can sold time Warner to 80 and teach john stanky and

yeah it's just like get rid of this thing and it's always a series of get it of getting rid of

this i mean and every deal has resulted in in a catastrophe i mean disney is now is now in a in a

you know you know continues to be in a significantly weaker position because they bought

rupert murdox company um and and we continue i mean in viacom which was was was a disaster

until um until the elicence came along and bought it um down the road one after another um that's

uh there there there just is no there is no good outcome of this and uh and the elicence may be

the the last man standing there is no one to sell to uh they've they've created a situation in

which the buck stock stops with them i don't know how they get out of this so much speculation

about what happens with cnn assuming the deal goes through and we should point out the california

ag has said not so fast this may not go through uh and they're supposed to be looking at it though

it's unclear actually what the california ag can really do here but assuming the deal goes ahead

does this mean do you think the merging of cbs news and cnn does it mean the spin-off of cnn

mark tomson the current cio of cnn issued a very british statement he is british former cio of the

new york times and the bbc the director general of the bbc issued a very british statement saying

keep calm and carry on everybody at cnn uh we've got such a new z environment at the moment let's

just do what we do best keep working stay focused but hard not to think yeah that means he's a

goner um and he he gets a huge payout too so jeez he's i'm sure that he can't wait until that door

closes behind him well and you can't help feeling for anderson kupa who was you know who got a

brief moment of glory when he left 60 minutes saying he wasn't going to stay only to realize

four days later that in fact paramount was going to buy cnn um yeah i guess um anderson kupers headed

for youtube that probably who headed for youtube right where else and here we find ourselves on

youtube and we love it we love it we love our comments we love our viewers we love the

direct ability to talk to the audience i highly recommend i would certainly i would certainly

rather be here than in any media organization um um well i like to think the daily

beast is is an media organization and we're we're benefiting from both um but but what happens

does barry wise that now uh notorious uh perhaps that's the best word to to use for her at the

moment um ahead of cbs news where she's had a very bumpy start since david elison bought her

start up the free press does she stay in charge of cnn do you think or do you think they bring in

a much more seasoned operation yeah i i'm i'm sure they well they they've probably um america

leads the world in medicine development it matters we get new medicines first nearly three years

faster five million americans go to work because we make medicines here at home and not relying on

other countries keeps us safe but china is racing to overtake us will we let them or will we choose to

stay ahead when america leads america cures let's tell washington to keep us in the lead

learn how at america cures dot com pay for by farma i thought some about this but not too much

about this i mean they just got this company the other day um right but they've been planning on

doing this for some time they must have some kind of strategy well you know jesus i would never

assume these people have strategies um i i don't it's and i and i don't know and they but they

probably they um i i mean there's a lot of different questions here i mean there's a question of

do you merge these organizations you keep them separate um you know i mean there's different

thing the broadcast broadcast news broadcast culture versus cable news cable culture uh

virtue versus the whole business model of these two of these two different things which are

which are quite quite different in themselves um and and then the and then always the question of

these entertainment guys is do they really want to be in the news business and the answer i can

answer that question they don't really want to be in the news business well that they may have

looked at fox news and thought fox news is making money has been a very successful business why

has no one taken fox news on why are the broadcast networks and cnm perceive to be liberal news

and why isn't there a rival to fox yeah but even that has business um i'm i mean huge

business problems in in um in implementing that i mean i mean cnm gets to get its position in

um on on cable networks because it's the opposite of fox if it became fox then cable networks

who pay the bills i mean all of the money basically comes from the cable come from cable companies

who are and their subscribers then the cable companies say hey to to conservative stations which

one do we want fox or or um or cnm i mean these are these are major business problems and then

layer on top of that that it's the cable it's the cable business which is collapsing as we speak

and has for has for some time i mean that's the business that the elephants have gotten themselves

into i mean just one that's actually just one one of the problematic parts of an incredibly

problematic business at virtually every turn there is across there there that the the spectrum

of businesses that they have very few optimistic notes well i think all we can say is come on in

Anderson the waters warmer youtube there's going to be a lot of people leaving cnm i fear um

well michael johanna we've covered a lot of ground

um and um and always more to go and always more to guys we'll be back on Tuesday god willing and

until then everybody please leave us a comment on what you think of all the different things we've

talked about iran what's going on inside trump's head there and thropic should companies be allowed

to specify how the government uses their product and warner brothers what are you going to be

watching that's going to be a big big series of options a huge bundle there i'm not sure i need

any of it apart from maybe h we know well you don't most and a good part of the audience has long

ago decided that right Michael before we go i want your advice i am following in your footsteps

and launching a sub stack next week it's going to be called primal scream which i think we mentioned

on our last podcast but i i want so much following in my footsteps that you've merely replaced the

word scream for uh what mot howl which is what mine is called but you know what i like doing what

i feel my gesture of the moment is is to just go like this and become the scream i'm going to

continue to carve on this i think you should change your name it's i'm totally not changing it primal

scream it's a very good name it's named after a rock band and i like the visual when i was looking at

the different vision considering that i am your partner in this and then doesn't you don't think

people are going to say gee she just stole that from him they may do they may think that but then

i'm going to be writing as about slightly different things to the things you're writing about

or i'm going to be writing about obviously all the reasons we need to scream but i'm going to be

throwing in some more culture stuff and i want to talk about you know beauty and what it's like

being a slightly older woman in this culture i use the word slightly under advisement

well we're advice how often should i be writing do you do you read your comments do you answer your

comments i do i do i do i mean comments on on sub stack are somewhat more manageable because

because you're only your paid subscribers get to make a comment now i'm not sure actually that's

true that that may be a choice that you that you that you make but in my case only the paid

subscribers get to comment and what sort of comments do they leave

they leave you know intelligent comments they're engaged with them with with the material they

they're they're they're smart they're worthy of engagement they're worthy of engagement good as

are our comments on on youtube and i always feel a sense of enormous frustration that i can only

ever answer a very limited number because so many people have so many really valuable thoughts and

good ideas and different takes on things and it's impossible to answer as many as we have but i

love the conversations and actually when we drop the podcast and it goes live for the first time

there's a very lively spirited conversation about people who are used to being there and awaiting for

and then there is a different slightly more reflective nature of comment with them with people who

leave them in the youtube comments in the in the non-live comments and i just want to remind people

that the address is beast.pub forward slash scream so beast.pub forward slash scream see you on

sub stack see you on sub stack michael so the good news is we have so many bee beast tier members

now there are too many names to read out and we really appreciate your support thanks to our

production team devin rogerino ryan marie rachel passe heather persaro neal rosenhaus

us a knows dynamic duos can save the day like super heroes and sidekicks or auto and home insurance

with us a you can bundle your auto and home and save up to 10% tap the banner to learn more and get

a quote at us a dot com slash bundle restrictions apply it's tax season and at life lock we know

you're tired of numbers but here's a big one you need to hear billions that's the amount of

money and refunds the irs has flagged for possible identity fraud now here's another big number

100 million that's how many data points life lock monitors every second if your identity is stolen

will fix it guarantee one last big number save up to 40% your first year visit life lock dot com slash

podcast for the threats you can't control term supply