Stephen Miller Goes Off The Rails Raising Major Alarm Bells At WH

Welcome to I've had it weekend. We are back with one of our favorite guests, David Rothkov. How are you? I'm good. How are you? You know, I'm just, I'm, you said, I was on your podcast last week. You dangerously tiptoed into saying you kind of felt a little bit of hope, but as a Jewish person, you're not supposed to say that, right? No, I immediately, I immediately left the podcast and fell down the stairs. I mean, you know, that's what happens, right? But you know, there, I mean, it's because the election results were a little hopeful. There was, there was another one this week with a little hopeful in Florida with the performance of Agnes Nixon. You know, this freaked out. Of course, everybody in the Democratic establishment, who were like, oh, no, now we've elected somebody who thinks everyone should have a health care. Oh my god. All right, let's, let's take a gander at John Ossoff. He has been attacking Trump. And to me, it's such an easy thing to do, but he seems to be rising up and attacking Trump better than any other Democrat right now. And of course, he brought up Natalie Harp, who I call the bunny boiler all law, the fatal attraction film, where Glenn close boils the kids bunny. So he brought up the bunny boiler Natalie, right? And MAGA is having a stage five meltdown. The White House is having a stage five meltdown. And he doubles down on it. He goes on Lawrence O'Donnell last night with a blow torch. And he continues attacking MAGA play the clip. Lawrence, it's been amazing to watch this White House meltdown over this all week. And about Natalie Harp, these White House staffers are adults. Public officials paid by the taxpayer with immense power in positions of public trust. And whether it's Natalie Harp, printing out Donald Trump's daily dose of delusion and flattery, or Peter Navarro steering taxpayer funded loans to Trump family investments, or Pete Heggsef deluding the president daily into deepening this quagmire in the Middle East. No one cares about their feelings. David. Love this guy. I love this guy. Been on podcast with you before in which when he was sort of just emerging in this voice that he has adopted, I was calling him purple mom Donnie. Because you know, he's got that kind of vibe that mom Donnie has, but he's in a purple state. So how much better is it, right? You have a 39 year old guy who actually knows how to communicate, who is not pulling his punches, who's willing to fight, who wants to end fascism, who wants to help what is happening for people. He's doing it in Georgia. He's going to win again by a substantial amount in Georgia. And he has taken it to him. And you know, immediately you've got all these other dams going, no soft pedal and so forth. But forget it. He's the future. Turn the page. Whether it's him or, you know, AOC, if you're looking for the people who are actually speaking truth to power and understand the zeitgeist right now, you've got to go to people like also. And you know, he's saying I'm not thinking about the presidency, which he shouldn't, he should think about winning. But he is definitely going to be near the top of that list of candidates or at the top of that list of candidates. And I am 100% for it, because you know, he is, you know, he is in the in the in the last question you talked about, you know, Democrats turning on the progressives. He's the guy who can bring it all together. He's the guy who can frame it in the terms of a big red Southern state and in the terms of people who are under 40, all at the same time. And that's that's the sweet spot for me. I completely agree. I mean, this guy, the more and more he speaks, I love that he is centering the corruption. And it's so easy to pick on these people because they're so immature and idiotic. But also we need to keep talking about, because we've all been talking about Natalie Hart for months. And now the mainstream media is talking about her because of John Ausef. He brought it to the mainstream. But I think it's fun to talk about these things as long as we don't get distracted by them because the real story with Natalie Hart is national security. This woman is with Trump at all times. We know this because his tweets that come out at three and four in the morning. There is proper spelling and proper grammar, which we know from 2016. He was incapable of doing on his own. So she's with him all the time crafting these things. So got only knows what she knows. Maggie Haberman says Natalie was a channel for foreign leaders to reach Trump. Let's play the clip. I can't some other way. She's a channel by which he reaches people he sees on television who he likes what they are saying or that he'll just send out notes to. She is with him so much of the day during those meetings. And she is talking to him throughout the evening about social media posts. So she is a specific channel of information. But she is one that he considers very important. And so do other people outside the White House. You know, David, you're a national security expert. What would the Republicans be doing if the roles were reversed here? If Obama or Biden had a 35-year-old aid that was by their side, all of the time was zero national security clearance? Well, they'd be freaking out. But you know, I mean, that's what they should be doing, right? Because we've seen this movie before. Jared couldn't get his clearance. Ivanka couldn't get clearance. And Trump said it's okay. We've seen how Trump treats national security, operational security, you know, when he stored top secrets, nuclear secrets in the bathroom at Mar-a-Laga. I, you know, I got to say, the Natalie Harp story scares me. And I think Bunny Boyle is a good way to refer to her. I, you know, the sort of lurid, you know, is she or isn't she story? I'm not that interested in the fact that she's clearly out of her gourd that her brother is out there. Saying, you know, she's sending the love notes and she's obsessed and she's hiding out in the back of a SUV in order to get into the, I mean, seriously, into the president's motorcade or their video of her running across the golf course to catch up with him. She's nuts. She is a Bunny Boyle. But on top of that, she has no security clearance. And she is the person who's closest to the president of the United States all the time. And we know the president of the United States kind of likes our enemies better than he likes our allies. I mean, we saw earlier this week him say that, you know, he didn't want to support South Korea and military exercises we have with South Korea because he has a good relationship with Kim Jong Un. Yeah. You know, and, you know, it's like holy shit. If you had said at any point, in the past 80 years, 60 years, 50 years, let's just say after the Korean war where American soldiers went and died, that an American president was going to say, I like the North Korean guy better than I like the South Koreans. It would have been the end. It would have just pulled the plug. They would have taken him out of the White House, maybe in a catering cart. And that would have been it, right? But so it's this combination. She has no security clearance. I guarantee you that dozens of other people in the White House or in the Trump higher ranks don't have a security clearance. You think Jared has one now? He's not even doing his financial disclosure. And he's the pointy end of the spear for most of our big negotiations. You think Steve Whit cough has one, you think? So anyway, the point is there are a lot of people around him who don't have security clearance. He doesn't care. He likes the bad guys better than he likes the good guys. And on top of that, he's going nuts and she's nuts. I mean, what could go wrong? Right? So speaking of nutty people surrounding Donald Trump, no one in my mind is more dangerous or evil than Stephen Miller. Stephen Miller is a special kind of crazy. But also, I think that a good line of attack on Stephen Miller is the Republican argument about women being in politics is, oh, they're emotional, women are too emotional being politics. And I don't know if you've seen Stephen Miller speak, but he is the most hysterical, histrionic, emotional thing I have ever seen in my life. And here's a clip of him in absolute hysterics on Hannity, play the clip. It seems like the legacy media will never tell the story about the crazy left or what the president does. Why? Because the legacy media, Sean, is fundamentally corrupt. They are an extension of an arm of the Democrat party. Honestly, Sean, the media, the legacy media like CBS and ABC and NBC and every other legacy outlet exists to serve and advance the interests of the Democrat party. Throw in New York Times, throw in Washington Post, throw in the Atlantic. They should all be required to register as a Democrat political action. I've heard enough. All of these things are now owned by mega people. All of the media is now owned by mega people. I mean, CBS is run by the Ellisons and Barry Weiss. You just don't get any more fascist than that's a trifective fascism. Larry and David and Barry, I mean, it's unbelievable the lies. David, what's your take on all that? It's exactly the same as your take, he's frankly, he's run out of things to say, right? So what he's doing is he's repeating old things which are no longer true because the Ellison's do own CBS and the Ellison's are on the verge of owning CNN and ABC did before they showed a little spine this week, did bend the knee and settle a suit with Trump over the George Stephanopoulos thing. And the Washington Post is owned by Jeff Bezos and the legacy media right now is owned by right-wing Republicans for the most part. And the ones that aren't the New York Times, which occasionally does some good reporting, is spends over backwards so much to both sides everything. Did you got to ask yourself, where are you actually hearing the unvarnished truth? And I think that's the bigger issue. The bigger issue is the White House lies all the time. The right-wing media lies all the time. The White House has launched a campaign against anybody who has an narrative that's different from theirs, including in academia. They don't want them teaching history, they don't believe it. They want to change the history that you view at the Smithsonian. There is this massive effort to lobotomize the United States of America. And there are very few places, present company excluded, where you can turn to actually get the truth. And so at the moment, we have the biggest number of information tools at our disposal, the whole Internet. AI, everything is out there and AI is producing slop. We have all this stuff out there. We're getting stupider as a country. And that's how you end up with a guy like Stephen Miller, who I'm sure sleeps upside down, hanging from a raptor, and drinks the blood of insects, because he is, you know, some strange creature from a horror movie, but all, by the way, is he's trying to get over the fact that his wife, David Eric Swallow, which is a whole other story. Oh, yeah, I mean, what's her story? Anyway, the point is, of course, he's crazy. The problem is, and this is a big problem, Janet. I don't think we talk about it enough. Donald Trump is old. He doesn't like doing the presidency. I mean, you saw him yesterday walking around the South Lawn of the White House going, and over here, we have Granite that's going to last a million years. And you're like, isn't there a war going on? Isn't the economy going to shit? Aren't there things for him to be doing? You know, why? He's doing it because he doesn't like doing it. So what happens when a president is in decline, and he doesn't really want to do the job? It gets sloughed off to somebody else. And we've seen it. I wrote a thing about this for the Daily Beast, plus we, you know, when Woodrow Wilson had a stroke, his wife became the acting president. When Franklin Roosevelt was in his decline, there was a little group around him who did the president's stuff. When Eisenhower had multiple heart attacks, same thing. When Reagan was in his decline because he had been shot, and he had dimensioned stuff, they wouldn't even ask him questions after midnight, same with Nixon, what he was drunk. And this is where we're getting, because that's why the Stephen Miller story is important. Because Trump's checking out. So who's doing the job? Who's the effective president of the United States right now? And they call Stephen Miller the prime minister. Right? And so, you know, you got to think, holy shit. Trump is, you know, I don't know, getting fitted for whatever that apparatus he keeps in the back of his pants is. And so, you know, Stephen Miller is like checking the boxes on the memos, going to attack this and round these people up and, you know, destroy the constitutional rights of these people. And so, yeah, he's, you know, it's crazy, but he's dangerous. All right. Here's, it gets worse. So your area of expertise is form policy. It gets worse. Everything that you just said, and then I have something else for you. Here he is, the propaganda involved in this clip is such a, that I'm about to play. It goes hand in hand with the unraveling that they're doing. They're rearranging the government. I heard Ruth Benge out the other day, say that this is, they're setting it up like a mafia style government, you know, that Trump is the mafia boss. But they have to propagandize to their base. And a lot of the lies that the Republicans have very successfully landed in flyover America is we're great with the economy, trickle down economics. These billionaires, those job creators, they are better than you. Poor people are lazy. And we're so good on national defense. We are incredible. We love the troops. We are the most patriotic. We hug American flags and we are incredible with foreign policy. And they have landed that long before Trump walked in and inherited this because people that I know that are Republicans just all of the things about the economy that you and I talking about them, tanking it, they always end up starting wars that are based on lies and all of this shit. But middle America believes the Republican party is best at this. And here is Steven Miller, continuing this same propagand that started long before the Trump regime. I mean, every Republican presidency always is dunking on it. We're so awesome at all of this shit. And they're really terrible at it. Here's Steven Miller with another meltdown. Play this clip. President Trump has been in office in the second term for a year and a half and has solved problems that plague this nation for decades generations or even longer. I mean, just go through the foreign policy piece here. He's completely rebalanced our trading relationship with Canada. He has protected American manufacturing and essential supply chains from China. He has completely rebalanced NATO and ensured that other nations pay their fair share. What planet is he living on? The Canadians fucking hate us right now because it's him. And you know how hard it is to get a Canadian to hate anything. They're predispositing. They're sitting there having Tim Wharton's donuts and a beer and they're like fine with the world. And we have somehow alienated them our closest friends on the planet. But it's all because of what you're saying here. And it really, really gets to me because frankly, if the average American fly over American American anywhere read a 900 word history of the past 80 years, they wouldn't believe anything the Republicans said. Because as we said before, when there's a recession, when the jobs aren't being created, when the stock market goes down, when the deficit goes up, it's Republicans. When we are fighting a stupid war badly, it's the Republicans who got us into the Iraq war, the biggest foreign policy disaster that we had seen prior to this. Republicans who turned them into never ending wars. Republicans who turned the defense budget into this giant sponge sucking up the resources of the United States of America so that we don't have the money for schools or hospitals or the other things we need. Republicans who warned us about it? Well, as it happened, that was a Republican too. Dwight Eisenhower in 1961 said the military industrial complex is going to eat America alive if we don't control it. But nobody listened. This is the problem Americans don't understand. And on defense right now, let's think about it, or foreign policy right now, the trade policy of this administration is insane, is going to be reversed, has cost this country hundreds of billions of dollars and is going to continue to until this guy is gone because he's just, you know, he's obsessed with the trade policies, the terror policies sit down for this one of William McKinley in the 19th century. That's who he's modeling his trade policies after. But as bad as all that is, blowing up NATO is worse. He didn't get people to pay. He's destroying it. He's cutting back on resources. He has alienated our NATO allies. Now, where's he going with that? Well, let's go after the Asian allies. He said he is not participating in the military exercises with the South Koreans, because they didn't support his stupid fucked up war with Iran. So that our alliances in the east, our alliances in the west, they're falling apart. What do you add on top of that? Pied Hexas, okay, our frat boy defense secretary is the worst person who has ever been responsible for the US defense community ever. He has fired people with experience because they were women or they were people of color. He has dumped programs that helped elevate people because he thought they smacked of DEI, ways of story today where they shut down a program to help us develop and be in the lead on drone technology because they wanted to go backwards to old school ways of fighting wars. You've got people on the USS Abraham Lincoln eating bowls of mold for breakfast, because they don't have the food and we and and on top of that, the way they fought this war is we've depleted all of our reserves of precision weapons of the weapons we would need to fight the next war. And guess what, folks, it's not going to be fixed tomorrow. They're going to announce a bunch of contracts and say, okay, we've got this going. It's going to take years and years and years and it's why Trump can't escalate with your rod. And, you know, you know, small consolation. perhaps in that, but putting carrier task forces out at sea for 250 days means, and everybody in the Navy knows this, means that they then have to go back for 17, 18, 20 months, two years to get put back into combat worthy shape. And so the way he has mismanaged this war means that for the next several years, because of the weapons, because of the wear and tear on our systems, because of the reallocation of assets, you know, we had one carrier battle group off the coast of China. It was the USS George Washington. Where is it now? It's replacing the Abraham Lincoln in the Persian Gulf. So you've got this incredible mismanagement and then on top of that, as if it weren't enough to enter a stupid war, lose the war to Iran, lose our strategic advantage, blow up the global economy, destroy the morale of the American troops. Now Trump has got the Republicans on the verge of say, yeah, let's have a $1.5 trillion defense budget that Pete can handle. Pete, who has story this week said he can't go on a fucking trip without his wife, because they're afraid he's going to go on a drunken bender. You know, that this is the guy who's in charge of $1.5 trillion budget, which is all full of programs that are so crazy, like Trump battleships, that, you know, the Navy realized they didn't need battleships anymore after the 1940s. Okay, 80 years ago, but there was going to be Trump has his golden dome project, you know, that no expert I know thinks will actually work and it will cost hundreds of billions of dollars. This is a waste of money, but combine this waste of money with the big, beautiful bill and the tax cuts for billionaires, and that's how you get the deficit, overspending on bad things. And what the people who are listening to this get for it is no healthcare subsidies, shut down veterans administration's hospital, shut down rural hospitals, shut down schools, shut down program for disabled kids, shut down, you know, so we're losing services. Billionaires are happy. Defense contractors are happy. Our enemies are happy and we and our allies are holding the bet. Okay, two follow-up questions that number one. How big of a favor is Trump doing for our adversaries, Putin and China, by dismantling all of the power that the United States had, as I think Susan Rice calls it, the suicide of a superpower, as he's dismantling all of these things. You have the Vice President talking about how great it is to devalue the dollar. You have Donald Trump kissing up to all of our adversaries. You have China and Russia now suddenly doesn't have to spend that much money to position themselves in a better place than we are. And secondly, with like Pete Hagceth and all of these people, do you think the 2028 nominee should go full tilt? We're going to investigate every single one of these people and we're going to investigate Pete Hagceth for war crimes, for all of the people that he killed in the Caribbean, for the triple tap. We are going to investigate thoroughly every single person in this regime for war crimes. And we make that a part of the campaign. Or do you think the Democrats are going to do what they always do? And it's like, oh, we just need to bring people together. We need to overlook all of this. So two part question. I know it's loaded. Well, first of all, the allies are happy. Putin and Xi Jinping ever get together. They can invite Kim Jong Un into the room. They are going to be saying to themselves, let's drink a toast to Donald Trump. No one has done more for our country's leadership in the world, each in a different way. You know, as the United States stops investing in science as the United States turns people away from our schools, as the United States essentially eviscerates the engines of R&D within our society. Who benefits China? Who moves ahead? China is the United States loses credibility on the international stage as a champion of the international system of international law. Who benefits China? When we waste our weapons systems and we stop providing aid to Ukraine, who benefits Russia? When we eliminate sanctions because we don't want a global oil crisis associated with this crazy war. Who benefits? Russia, China, Iran. No one, not the Ayatollah Hameini, not the Ayatollah Hameini's son who is now in charge of Iran, has ever done more to improve the strategic position of Iran than Donald Trump. He should win whatever the highest order is they have to offer. And I hope he makes a trip to the country to accept it. But you know, the Iranians have gained from him being in power. And meanwhile, all of our allies have lost and they've gained some independence because they don't trust us anymore and they're not going to for a while. Now the second part of your question, should these people be held accountable? It shouldn't even be a question, but I know because I don't know the Democrats campaign on that. Look, I think Democrats should campaign on it because I think corruption and the culture of impunity is related to inequality in the United States is related to doing everything for the oligarchs and screwing everybody else is related to how the system is rigged. But I also think, this is where a lot of my democratic colleagues, I think, come up a little bit short, that unless you hold people accountable for this kind of theft, this kind of mismanagement, this kind of serial violation of international law, serial violation of US law, they're going to do it again. If you think that Donald Trump is going to go as, by the way, sweet Joe Biden kind of thought, you know, if you think he's just going to go away and things will go back to normal, I got a bridge to sell you because there is somebody else coming down the pike who's a white supremacist, Christian nationalist, you know, a nut job, maybe in a different kind of suit. And we saw unbelievably, unbelievably, Pete Heggseth campaigning in Iowa because he thinks he can be the next president of the United States. And you know, something, I think that's absolutely insane. You want to know something else? In 2016, I got a national television over and over again and I said, it's insane to think Donald Trump can win. I was completely wrong and we need to sort of open up our minds a little bit and realize that these guys could come back and they will and they will do everything that Trump has done. They'll say, well, he didn't have to follow the law. He didn't need Congress. He didn't did it. Unless people are in the slammer doing hard time because they tried to bring down the rule of law in the United States. No, I completely agree. And I think that, you know, if you look at hungry, Victor Orban Orban was defeated because his, the guy who won Maygar, I think his name is, he ran on corruption, stamping out corruption. And so that's why I'm really liking Ossov that he is centering the corruption. And we need to center the biggest problem the Democrats for a long time before Trump that I have seen, living in a red state for 50 years, is that the Democratic party treats the Republican fringe as, oh, that's just fringe. That's crazy. And they just brushed it off and they brushed it off. Well, now the fringe is governing the entire country. Now the fringe is terrorizing the entire world. And we have to start really attacking the French and taking the French seriously. And I think it's a little bit of the arrogance, intellectual arrogance of a lot of the people in the Democratic party to just be, oh, well, nobody will believe that. That's crazy. Well, I mean, we have a president who wakes up every morning and pathologically lies every single day. And it's become completely normalized. I want a Democratic party that isn't afraid of going to, taking it to the Republican party, calling out their Christian hypocrisy because the Republican party has successfully weaponized Christianity. And it's very, very, very effective in the places where I live. And it needs to be dismantled. I'm going to be really curious to see how Tallahuret goes race. You know, it comes out because he's kind of attacking the hypocrisy and that. But I really want the Democratic party to start growing a pair. And that's why I'm liking us off so much right now, because I think there's just such a thirst, whether you're a leftist, a progressive, a DSA, a moderate, whatever, for a fighter. And you're hearing it, right? Tallahuret goes saying the same thing. And people like Alyssa Slotkin, who I think based some day run for president, who's a moderate, saying the same kind of thing. And the reality is we can't pull our punches. We've got to go out. after these people, and it's not just for retribution. And that's the important thing to realize. You've talked a lot about national security here, and I think one of the great failings of the Biden administration, who in Biden was a very experienced and foreign policy, more experienced and foreign policy than any US president. He was surrounded by good people or friends of mine or experts in foreign policy. They failed to recognize that the greatest threat to the United States of America was domestic. They failed to recognize that the greatest threat to our strategy in Ukraine was that Donald Trump might be reelected and pulled the rug out from under that strategy. They failed to recognize that they had to stand up and do something about them. And that's where you end up with Merrick Garland whittling his thumbs and saying, the institutions will take care of themselves. The institutions will not take care of themselves. We've got to take care of the institutions. And that means that the Democrats have got to step up. And there will be plenty. There will be the shimmers and the Hakeem Jeffries and the others who are like, no, let's talk about affordability. Yeah, let's talk about affordability. But if you don't think that the international policy crisis, the corruption crisis and the affordability crisis are all directly linked and how our system has been rigged and taken over by a tiny group of people who are trying to suck the blood out of the United States at the expense of all of the rest of us. And that we've got to fix that if we want to recover internationally, recover at home. Then you don't understand what's going on. I think also it understands. I think there are people there that understand. And I think what the election is likely to show this November is that where Democrats do well, it may be progressives. It may be people who are called moderates is when people say, I'm gonna fight. The system is rigged, I'm gonna fix it. I'm willing to speak truth to power. I don't want these, I don't want to be part of the Democrats whose first impulse on every damn thing that happened is let's figure out what our compromise is gonna be. It's so maddening. It's so maddening being a Democrat and watching just the thing that bothers me the most is when they capitulate to right wing framing when they start seeding ground instead of just fuck you know, we're not seeding to that. No way. - Well, that's a keen Jeffries with the DSA. You know, there's a lot of craziness in the DSA. There's a lot of good in the DSA. It's a mixed bag, right? - Totally. - But a keen Jeffries going in and saying, well, I'm against defund the police. Well, so are 90% of the people. - It's the dumbest branded, yeah. - Right, but what he's doing is he's playing into Donald Trump's hands. You know, he's saying, oh yeah, I'm against these commies. Why is he? Why is he doing it? Is it 'cause he believes that? Or is it because he thinks it's a threat to his leadership? It's a threat to his position. I mean, it's the same with freaking APEC going after, you know, he wants that money. APEC is going after John Ossov because he voted against sending money to Israel. When first of all, the majority of Americans and the majority of American Jews oppose sending further military assistance to Israel. But you've got APEC in Georgia running against him and preferring the Republican or running against El Sayed and preferring Rogers who are professional. - Totally. Well, because the current Israeli government is also fascist. You know, all of the fascists in the world are all colluding. But final question for you. And I think this is really going to be something that the Democratic Party doesn't want to talk about, but the base is forcing them into it. Will the 2028 Democratic nominee your prediction take a bold stance? Absolutely no more aid to Israel offensive or defensive. - Yeah, I think they will actually, I mean, the way you phrased it, I don't know if it was very carefully phrased that way or not. I think that's not the dividing line on that issue. I think most Democrats will say no more aid to Israel. Israel is a rich country. We don't give aid to France. We don't give aid to England. We should treat Israel as any other ally. If they want to buy our weapons, we will sell them to them if they are complying with the law and if they're supporting our international interests. In other words, that's where I think Democrats are going to come out. There is a sort of second line in this argument, which is we should not sell, we should embargo the sale of weapons to Israel. And I think that's where there's going to be a bit of an internal fight. Personally, my view is it all depends on whether they follow the law and support our national interests because that's how we treat every other country in the world. If they are pursuing policies that undermine stability in the Middle East or undermine what we think needs to be done there, which is to say the creation of a Palestinian state or the end of war crimes in Gaza and the end of war crimes in the West Bank, then maybe we'll be open to selling them some weapons. If, and again, there are the lehi laws in place, you can't, the US is not supposed to sell weapons to countries that deny humanitarian aid who people that need it. We're not supposed to sell weapons to countries that violate international or commit war crimes. Israel's doing those things. So right now, they are not eligible to even be sold these weapons. There's a debate in the Democratic Party of where the line should be. I actually think the interesting part of the debate without getting off too much on a foreign policy tangent is actually where do we use the leverage we've got to punish Israel and pressure it into doing things that are more consistent with our policy. Like, you know, should they be sanctioned for what they're doing in the West Bank? Should they be penalized by us for what they're doing in the West Bank? Should they be sanctioned for what they didn't Gaza? Should they be forced? Should we use the leverage we've got to advance the idea of a Palestinian state? I think the answer to those questions is yes, yes, yes. And yes, we ought to use our power to advance our interests, not because it's Israel, but because that's what countries do. That's what foreign policy is about. It's using your power to advance your interests, and we stop doing that with Israel for dumb political reasons, and it's time to move on. - Yeah, I completely agree. All right, David, it's always so good to always learn so much, and I know my audience does too. Thank you so much for joining me. - I've really enjoyed it. Hope to see you soon.