June 12, 2025 • 34 mins
I think the US anticipates that Iranian retaliations against our assets in Iraq would follow any Israeli strike. This concern contributed to Washington's decision to advise some Americans yesterday to leave the region.
Oil prices edged higher over the past week. Why?
Oil prices edged higher over the past week. Why?
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
A straddle lounger took off from an air base I
think in a Qatar and immediately upon takeoff turned off
its transponder. Some embassies are being evacuated. There are things
afoot in the Middle East, and while much of the
(00:24):
West and the debate in the West kind of remains
trapped in a bunch of stupid slogans and false moral tropes,
events on the ground in the Middle East are taking
some sort of decisive turn. I'm not sure what it is.
Embassies have begun to evacuate non essential staff. Military dependents
(00:47):
are being authorized to leave key bases. There are multiple
reports saying that US officials have been told that Israel
is fully ready to launch an operation against the Iranians
if required, and of course DC expects that there would
be Italian uh Iranian retaliation on American sites in Iraq.
Speaker 2 (01:12):
In fact, I.
Speaker 1 (01:14):
Cannot confirm this, but the story is floating around. Yesterday
evening were that the Embassin in Baghdad is being evacuated.
All of that's interesting in light of some of the
things that we have been told before.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
For example, an.
Speaker 3 (01:37):
Did you warn Primis or that Nabu against taking some
sort of actions that could disrupt the talks there.
Speaker 4 (01:43):
In a phone call last week, Well, I like to
be honest, yes I did. Next question, please, actions, did the.
Speaker 2 (01:53):
Center Republicans want to press warning?
Speaker 4 (01:55):
I said, I don't think it's appropriate.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
What exactly did you tell them to?
Speaker 2 (02:00):
I don't think it's appropriate.
Speaker 4 (02:01):
We're talking, we're having very good discussions with them, and
I said, I don't think it's appropriate right now.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
Oh, you know, when you listen like I do, and
as you should, I tell him I don't think it's
appropriate right now. Oh.
Speaker 1 (02:17):
This was on May twenty eight, so a couple of
weeks ago. Yeah, just you know, around Memorial Day.
Speaker 4 (02:24):
Because if we can settle it with a very strong documentary,
very strong with inspections and no trust. I don't trust anybody.
I don't trust anybody, so no trust. I wanted very strong,
where we can go in with inspectors, we can take
whatever we want, we can blow up whatever we want,
but nobody getting killed.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
I don't know why.
Speaker 1 (02:47):
I just find that absolute should should I say, hilarious.
Speaker 4 (02:56):
Very strong, where we can go in with inspectors, we
can take whatever we want, want, we can blow up
whatever we want, but no, I.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
Love that.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
We'rethy f in the United States of America. We can
blow up anything we want, we can take anything we want,
we can do anything we want. He's just crazy enough
that he might but.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
He getting killed.
Speaker 4 (03:18):
We can blow up a lab, but nobody's going to
be in the lab, as opposed to everybody being in
the lab and blowing it up, right, two ways of
doing it.
Speaker 1 (03:27):
Yeah, well, we'll just wait to the lab close down.
You know they've gone, they've gone home for the night.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
Kaboom. Yeah.
Speaker 4 (03:35):
I told him this would be inappropriate to do right
now because we're very close to a solution. Now that
could change at any moment, could change with the phone.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
He could change any moment, could change with a phone call.
Speaker 4 (03:47):
But right now, I think they want to make a deal,
and if we can make a deal, they save a
lot of lives.
Speaker 2 (03:55):
I actually believe him about that. Now.
Speaker 1 (03:59):
I don't mean to. I don't leave him about other things,
but I think right there, I think he is genuinely
saying I would prefer that we get a deal with
the Iranians and not go blow the S word out
of them right now. But what's my rule about butts?
(04:19):
You pay attention to what is said or written after
the butt. So now we have at least as of
last night, we've got multiple reports. They're saying that US
officials have told have been told that Israel Is fully
ready to launch an operation against the Iranians if required,
(04:42):
and that Washington expects those retaliations against our sites in Iraq.
Now why would they if the Iranians, I mean, if
the Israelis attack Iran's nuclear facilities, They've already already wiped
out the air force. So now you about their nuclear
nuclear program, Why would the Israeli the why would the
(05:06):
Iranians attack Americans? Because if the is the Israeli did,
Israelis have done it because this would if we were
to react to the Iranians attacking us, that would get
the Iranians what they want, uh wore, a broader war.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
In the Middle East. So why why is all this
going on?
Speaker 1 (05:34):
Well, the trigger is is the growing stockpile the Uranians
have of near weapons grade uranium and its preparations. They
had been doing preparations for potential retaliation strikes against Israel,
and of course we've had this breakdown in the progress.
The talks themselves haven't broken down, but in the nuclear
(05:55):
talks that they've pretty much come to a to a halt. Meanwhile,
in Gaza, we've forget about Gaza because that's that's part
of the whole jigsaw puzzle too.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
So, while while these.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
Idiot Western commentators obsess over supposed Israeli crimes in Gaza,
Hamas deliberately attacks the convoy of humanitarian aid workers, killing
and injuring those delivering life saving relief. There was a
all over X yesterday. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is reporting that.
(06:29):
So the entire region seems to be moving to dangerous thresholds.
While there are too many in the West that cling
to I think are delusional storylines and some sort of
moral theater. Why don't we always have this moral theater
that is always to the detriment of Israel. Well, anyway,
I don't think that moral theater can hide the facts.
(06:52):
US embassies across the Middle East, Eastern Europe, North Africa
have been all ordered to convene emergency action committees and
report their risk mitigation measures back to DC. That was
reported by the Washington Post, and that led little Marco.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
Isn't he been amazing?
Speaker 1 (07:11):
I think Senator Rubio, Secretary of Rubio, has been an
absolutely amazing Secretary of State. Anyway, he was the one
that authorized the departure of non essential personnel in Iraq.
A senior diplomat in the region said this, we are
(07:32):
constantly assessing the appropriate personnel posture at all of our embassies. True,
based on our latest analysis, we decided to reduce the
footprint of our mission in Iraq. We are watching and worried.
We think it's more serious than any other time in
the past. Well, our preparations and European preparations are beginning
(08:00):
to accelerate. But before we get there, when I talk
about this moral theater that we're playing in this little
Richard Haass Richard Haas over at MSNBC this morning said.
Speaker 3 (08:18):
This for Jonathan, at the moment, you can prepare for
military action in stays Israel, and that also can be
supportive of the negotiations. It focuses the Iranians on the
alternative to a negotiation, and you can also be preparing
for military actions. I do not think the Israelis would
use military for US over American objections.
Speaker 2 (08:38):
I am to disagree with him.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
I think that Netanyahu would confer with Trump and Trump
can try to persuade him not to. But if I've
ever learned to understand anything about the Israelis and y'ah
Who in particular, is that they will and should, in
(09:05):
my opinion, do whatever it takes to protect their country.
They build walls, they destroy their enemies, and they take
political risks doing so, and they know very well the
political risks. I've told you before about one time when
(09:26):
I was we were down near the Gaza strip Net
and Yah who was running for prime minister, and there
were there were rocket attacks, rockets launched out of Gaza.
Nothing new, right, except that this was in the middle
of a political campaign. So Neat and Yahoo, I'm with
a group with a delegation from the US and nat
(09:48):
Yaho runs over the site to to to do a
press conference, and I'm sitting there with a member of
the Kanesset, and I'm asking all these questions about why
do you operate so quickly to clean things up? Because
(10:11):
we had also toured other areas that been hit by
rockets that had been cleaned. Now, later that evening, I
gave a keynote address to Hersleiya Conference, to the Hursleia
Security Conference in Hersleia, which is just south of Tel Aviv,
and in the Q and A section, I was asked
(10:32):
some question I forget something about American media, and my
response to them was, you know, I, as an American,
I don't understand why you're so quick to clean up
any damage caused by rockets coming out of Gaza. You
need to show the world what they're doing. And this
(10:57):
general from the idea. If stood up and said, essentially,
mister Secretary, with all due respect, the American media will
report whatever it wants to report regardless of whether we
show them we don't show them, Whether we clean it
up today or two weeks from now, it won't make
(11:19):
any difference.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
The New York.
Speaker 1 (11:21):
Times will still report that it was our fault. He
was essentially chewing me out. And I learned from that
moment in my discussions with him afterwards, that regardless of
what the Israelis do, the stupid position of most of
(11:42):
the world is Israel always wrong, their enemies always right.
So when Richard hass is trying to convince us that
the Israelis would use military that the Israelis would not
use military force over American objections, I think he's wrong.
Speaker 3 (12:03):
You know, if Donald Trump goes to Bving neatna.
Speaker 2 (12:05):
Who hold off.
Speaker 3 (12:06):
I simply do not believe any Israeli prime minister would
would would I militarily here, I just don't. I just
don't buy that. The consequences of that would be too great.
So I don't think we've yet reached that point. But yeah,
because also you saw the report from the nuclear so
called watchdogs the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran has gone
much farther down the path towards accumulating an enormous urani
(12:29):
enrich uranium stockpile. They are not that far from having
a significant capability. Uh So, I think whatever cliche you
want to is, yes, the is the clock is ticking.
But again, I simply don't see the israelis doing this
over American objections. But at some point, if this administration
gives up on the agreement on the negotiations.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
Uh huh.
Speaker 1 (12:50):
So when Trump says to the reporter in that earlier SoundBite,
I ask him to hold off for right now, and
then go on to talk about there may be a
time when the question then becomes is this that time they.
Speaker 3 (13:09):
May tell the Israel least fine, because they do not want,
for good reason, for Ron to have a multiple nuclear devices.
I think one big questions for the administration are they
willing to compromise at all on Iran's ability to have
any enriched uranium and right now?
Speaker 1 (13:26):
And I would say no, there is no reason at
all to give the uraniums the ability to enrich uranium
at all. And the reason for that is if they
want enriched uranium for a nuclear for a civilian nuclear
energy program.
Speaker 2 (13:45):
You can buy that all over the world.
Speaker 1 (13:48):
I forget what the levels are for the enrichment, but
the level that you need for nuclear reactors you can
buy on the open market. For the level of ris
that you need for a nuclear warhead, you have to
do that yourself. So when Trump says I don't want
them to have any capability, I believe him. I don't
(14:13):
think you should blow off Trump.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
In this regard at all.
Speaker 1 (14:19):
So when military preparations begin to accelerate, for example, the
naval support activity in Bahrain, which is home to our
Naval Forces Central Command, they're on high alert right now,
interacts and bar province increased military air activities being observed.
I think the US anticipates that Iranian retaliations against our
(14:41):
assets in Iraq would follow any Israeli strike. This concern
contributed to Washington's decision to advise some Americans yesterday to
leave the region. Now, the Iranian posture is also evolving
in parallel. The New York Times is reporting that the
(15:04):
Iranian military and government officials have already meant to discuss
the response to a potential Israeli strike. A senior Iranian
official told the New York Times that Tehran has prepared
a response plan involving an immediate counter strike on Israel
with hundreds of ballistic missiles. Well, fire up the Iron Dome,
(15:25):
get ready. So why all of a sudden it is
this happening. No, not because the rides in la No,
not because they're trying to just look at some other
shiny object. I think the catalyst is the developments in
(15:45):
Iran's nuclear program. If you dig deep enough, you'll find
that the IAEA has a report, you can find it
on the Reuter's website that Iran has amassed about more
than four hundred kilograms of uranium enriched enriched to a
(16:06):
percentage that's high enough and a quantity that is sufficient
enough for at least one nuclear weapon, assuming that it's
further refined. And ostensibly the other thing that I read
yesterday is the Uranians are prepared to launch a couple
of ballistic missiles sometime today with two ton warheads on them.
(16:30):
Now they're duds. But what are they doing. Well, they're
acting like Kim Jong un. Let's don't put any live
warheads on the missiles. Well, let's test the missiles with
two ton dud warheads to see if we can control
them and get them to go where we will them
to go. Now, North Korea wants them to go out
into the South China Sea, which is usually what happens,
(16:52):
but not always. I think the Uranians are doing exactly
the same thing. In France and Germany, they're known as
the E three. They've signaled they're ready to trigger the
UN snapback provisions to reapply the sanctions on Iran if
their nuclear program continues unchecked, and a lot of diplomats
(17:14):
are saying that could come as early as two weeks.
So I think they are probably diplomatic efforts that are continuing.
I'm sure Rubio and his team are doing everything they can,
but I've got the feeling that we've kind of reached
the point of no return. There is a sixth round
of direct talks that are scheduled for the coming days.
(17:37):
Two officials that confirm the CBS News that Stephen Mitcoff,
the US Special Envoy in the Middle East, is planning
to attend, So that's elevating the intensity of the talks.
Oil prices went up yesterday somewhere between four and five percent.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
That's the high level in two months. Why did you
do that?
Speaker 1 (18:03):
Oh, because Persian Gulf shipping lanes would be affected by
any military estallation. Get ready, so mentioning that oil prices
edged higher over the past week. But it's curious. I'm
(18:24):
always fascinated by why well West Texas Intermediate went from
sixty four forty one on June six to sixty six
thirty two a barrel as of closing last night, gain
of about three percent. And then Brent Crewde has been climbing.
(18:45):
It reached sixty seven dollars eighteen cents on June ten.
That was a three point four to two percent monthly increase.
So both of those benchmarks are still about seventeen to
eighteen percent below last.
Speaker 2 (18:59):
Year benchmark levels.
Speaker 1 (19:03):
So JP Morgan has been forecasting a despite a verry
sh outlook. JP Morgan's been forecasting Brent at sixty six
for this year and fifty eight dollars for twenty twenty six.
So what are the what are the factors? When I'm
(19:24):
looking late yesterday afternoon at these stories, I'm really trying
to understand what are all of the different factors that
are occurring to cause this volatility in the oil market,
because I there's it's easy to say that gas prices,
(19:45):
retail gas prices are down, and they are down, but
they're not nearly down as much as what I thought
they would be, primarily because we're still reading from a
over abundant money supply, and while inflation is not rampant,
(20:06):
we still get all we still get to get all
this money out of the system. But here what I
found to be I think the biggest factors in impacting
the crude markets, and I share these with you because
if something happens in the Middle East, OPEK, who is
(20:27):
currently trying to well, OPEC is kind of screwed up
right now. Some are overproducing, some are underproducing. But if
there is an Iranian attack, and whether it spreads or not,
because tankers don't want to run the risk of moving
a lot of movement of oil will stop in the
(20:48):
Middle East, and that will affect the overall international markets.
So what's happened in recent days, Well, don't forget, we
had that Ukrainian drone attack on Russian air basis back
in June eighth. That caused some some spikes, and Russia
still faces export constraints from sanctions. They've reported a thirty
(21:14):
five percent year over year revenue drop, so there's a
supply disruption there now. Quite honestly, as a footnote, if
if Trump can't get putin to really start taking cease
fire or even peace negotiations.
Speaker 2 (21:32):
Seriously.
Speaker 1 (21:34):
Cut them off, because even though they have a thirty
five percent year over year revenue drop, still that's still
how they're funding the war. So if you want to
stop the war, stop the money, just stop the supply
of money. Meanwhile, Reuters again reported last week that Iran's
(21:54):
rejection of this nuclear deal keeps its three point eight
million barrel per day output under sanctions, and that elevates
the risk, as I said, for the future disruptions of
its exports, and again I would add not just their exports,
but Saudi exports as well. Then you got the wildfires
(22:15):
up in Alberta noil SAMs production. That tightens the North
American supply.
Speaker 2 (22:23):
So you add all those up.
Speaker 1 (22:27):
Any hiccup in Russia, any hiccup in the Middle East,
and we've got refinery problems in this country. Suddenly any
hiccup on a refinery that goes offline because suddenly there's
some problem with it. You can't just in most refineries.
You can't just shut down one little portion of You
(22:48):
gotta shut the whole thing down. You got the US
China trade talks going on, which I think the optimism
about the US China trade talks is way over blown,
but the hope for which is why I just don't
really like the market. Although I'm in the market, hopes
(23:11):
for a US China trade agreement are lifting demand expectations,
so just the hope has an effect. Go back to
Reuters again, they pointed out that two days ago Trump
and President g may soon speak again and that boosted
(23:32):
Brent by almost three percent. China's importing eleven point three
million barrels a day last year, and they can see
that demand rebound if tariff's ease. JP Morgan says this
trade progress reduces the downside risk for oil. China's appetite
is critical, so hope is the strategy for the market,
(23:59):
and I don't know why, but again going to Reuters,
our crude inventories are shrinking reduced US production that Diamondback
Energy notes that they're Q two twenty five peak and
to decline to thirteen point three million barrels a day
(24:23):
by Q four of twenty twenty six. Inventory draws, again
from some expert in this field says that inventory draws
are a classic bullish signal. Yeah, I totally understand that.
And then you have OPEC the mixed signals. So OPEK said, hey,
(24:49):
we're going to increase our production because we're trying to
regain market share away from US producers. Yet they haven't
been able to do that. Their actual output flags some
members like iraqing UAE or overproducing, and others are planning
to offset their prior excesses. So OPEC right now is
(25:11):
kind of in a I don't know, a weird in
fighting for lack of a better term. So the bottom
line would be this, there's steady rise in West Texas
International and Bent over the past eight to ten trading days,
and that reflects a market balancing short term bullish catalyst
(25:32):
against a barish long term outlook. Now you throw into
that mix all the geopolitical risks that trade hopes, which
I find hilarious, and in inventory draws that dominate the upside.
But then OPEC plus supplying demand concerns, those will temper
the hope expectations on the longer term. And then you've
(25:54):
got Trump's energy policies. And what are Trump's energy policies? Well,
one is he's moving to kill the California EV mandate.
He will reportedly, I haven't been watching the TV, but
supposedly today he's going to revoke the state of California's
waiver under the Clean Air Act.
Speaker 2 (26:17):
Now why is that important?
Speaker 1 (26:18):
Because that serves as the foundation for California's EV targets.
The news stories say that he will sign a series
of three resolutions passed under the Congressional Review Act back
in April and May, which would remove California's ability to
enforce its mandates on both passenger cars and heavy trucks,
(26:42):
which Trump and other opponents refer to as the California
EV mandate. The resolution's target the California Air Resource Board,
that is one of the most Marxists centrally planned economic
controllers in the entire country. They've got something called the
(27:07):
Advanced Clean Cars Program, Advanced Clean Truck Rules. All these
different programs invoke incentives, escalate penalties, all designed to force
buyers to abandon the internal combustion cars and then have
to replace them with either evs or at least some
(27:27):
of the car that I don't know what it would be,
but that qualifies as a zero emission vehicle referred to
as a z as ZEV.
Speaker 2 (27:36):
Under this stupid program.
Speaker 1 (27:38):
Now I'm targeting California right now in this story because
Trump plans to target California. But what I'm i about
to tell you is mirrored in Colorado. California's program calls
for a thirty five percent adoption of zero emission vehicles
(27:58):
by next year, sixty eight percent by twenty thirty, and
one hundred percent by twenty thirty five. The market is
not there, and the state is already way behind the
needed pace of adoption. The California government it self reports
that as of the end of last year, only six
(28:21):
percent of the light duty cars on the road would
qualify under the mandate. And yet by twenty thirty five,
which just ten years away. They want to get to
one hundred percent. You're way behind schedule. This is stupid.
You're trying to mandate and force Americans into vehicles that
(28:43):
they don't want, that they can't afford, and you're ignoring
the realities of the grid and the supply chains. There
are all sorts of stories circulating around Colorado about.
Speaker 2 (28:57):
How bad our grid is right now, and yet Paulus.
Speaker 1 (29:01):
Continues to pursue this dream of zero emissions, you know,
by twenty fifty or whatever the stupid year is. So
you want you talk about volatility in the oil and
gas commodity market.
Speaker 2 (29:16):
Holy cow.
Speaker 1 (29:17):
And then you put on top of that all of
the stories circulating right now about the Iranians.
Speaker 2 (29:24):
Things are about to get weird.
Speaker 4 (29:26):
Hey, Michael, I can only imagine gangsters and thugs riding
around in EV's in California and Denver. That would be
hilarious to see.
Speaker 2 (29:35):
Have a good one. It would be hilarious, wouldn't it.
Speaker 1 (29:39):
So let's go back to California for a moment, because
in all this kerfuffle that's going on about Trump's actions
that he allegedly is going to take some time today.
In fact, I think I saw in the schedule. I
think there are maybe there's a bill signing this morning.
I think of that has already taken place, and I
(30:01):
think there's some executive orders and some other proclamations this afternoon,
So maybe sometime this afternoon he's going to do it.
But in response to these threats, I don't really consider
the threats.
Speaker 2 (30:16):
I think they're just wise policy decisions.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
The spokesperson for the Sierra Club said something that I
think is worth noting. And it's worth noting because the
Attorney General of California has threatened to sue the administration
if indeed they revoke all of these permits under the
Clean Air Act and essentially kill the California ev mandate. Well,
(30:40):
get in line ensue because your cohort, the Sierra Club,
pointed out that this is indeed a national federal issue.
She warned that the rollbacks quote will choke communities with
smog and worse than climate disasters. Then she stepped in
(31:05):
and when she said this, this isn't just about California,
it's about the eighty million Americans in states following our lead. Oh,
that seems to be an a mission against interest that
seems to be in amission that, oh, California is impacting
(31:26):
interstate commerce and is impacting a federal regulation by basically saying,
in our state, you can't do this or you have
to buy that. And people are saying, we don't want this,
we don't want it. So why should I be forced
(31:47):
not take me out of it? Why should any relative
of mine in Texas or Oklahoma or New Mexico or
anywhere else, or any of your relatives in any state
other than Colorado, because we're just following California's lead. Why
should we be forced that when we go to a
car dealership, say in twenty thirty five or twenty fifty,
our choices are so limited because of California's mandate, because
(32:11):
automobile manufacturers are going to one to what, oh, well,
we've got to comply with California. Okay, Well, let's just
you know, revamp the assembly line and we'll just start
putting out all these cars. Well, they can't sell them now,
and so it's just going to drive up the price
of internal combustion engines. There'll be more demand for that.
(32:33):
People will be willing to pay that higher price because
they don't want the EVS. How can I claim they
don't want the evs. Quarterly us like do the vehicle sales.
When it comes to hybrid electric now those these are
hybrid electrics. This is where you have a like. Can't
(32:54):
think of any models, but it's both gas and battery powered.
That counts for twelve percent of light duty vehicle sales.
That's not a bad number, right, But battery electric is
less than eight somewhere around seven percent, and plug in
hybrids are all the way down less than two percent.
(33:17):
And that's not dramatically changed over the past five years. Oh,
the hybrid electric's gone up significantly, but all the others
are beginning to drop. But I thought we live in
a free market economy. I thought we lived in a
country where I got to make the choice, and that
(33:39):
manufacturers of whatever the product is.
Speaker 2 (33:41):
I don't give a rat that's what it is.
Speaker 1 (33:42):
But whatever product they're manufacturing, they look at what the
market wants, or they may try to create a new
product and then convince me it's something that I do want. Well,
they've failed on both strategies. People don't want these, so
why should we be forced to buy them? You know,
(34:05):
as somebody said on the text line, kings would be
the one that would do those kinds of mandates. So
when Gavin Newsom or Jared Polus accused Donald Trump of
being a king, who really is the king or trying
to be a king? Newsom and Polis
A straddle lounger took off from an air base I
think in a Qatar and immediately upon takeoff turned off
its transponder. Some embassies are being evacuated. There are things
afoot in the Middle East, and while much of the
(00:24):
West and the debate in the West kind of remains
trapped in a bunch of stupid slogans and false moral tropes,
events on the ground in the Middle East are taking
some sort of decisive turn. I'm not sure what it is.
Embassies have begun to evacuate non essential staff. Military dependents
(00:47):
are being authorized to leave key bases. There are multiple
reports saying that US officials have been told that Israel
is fully ready to launch an operation against the Iranians
if required, and of course DC expects that there would
be Italian uh Iranian retaliation on American sites in Iraq.
Speaker 2 (01:12):
In fact, I.
Speaker 1 (01:14):
Cannot confirm this, but the story is floating around. Yesterday
evening were that the Embassin in Baghdad is being evacuated.
All of that's interesting in light of some of the
things that we have been told before.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
For example, an.
Speaker 3 (01:37):
Did you warn Primis or that Nabu against taking some
sort of actions that could disrupt the talks there.
Speaker 4 (01:43):
In a phone call last week, Well, I like to
be honest, yes I did. Next question, please, actions, did the.
Speaker 2 (01:53):
Center Republicans want to press warning?
Speaker 4 (01:55):
I said, I don't think it's appropriate.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
What exactly did you tell them to?
Speaker 2 (02:00):
I don't think it's appropriate.
Speaker 4 (02:01):
We're talking, we're having very good discussions with them, and
I said, I don't think it's appropriate right now.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
Oh, you know, when you listen like I do, and
as you should, I tell him I don't think it's
appropriate right now. Oh.
Speaker 1 (02:17):
This was on May twenty eight, so a couple of
weeks ago. Yeah, just you know, around Memorial Day.
Speaker 4 (02:24):
Because if we can settle it with a very strong documentary,
very strong with inspections and no trust. I don't trust anybody.
I don't trust anybody, so no trust. I wanted very strong,
where we can go in with inspectors, we can take
whatever we want, we can blow up whatever we want,
but nobody getting killed.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
I don't know why.
Speaker 1 (02:47):
I just find that absolute should should I say, hilarious.
Speaker 4 (02:56):
Very strong, where we can go in with inspectors, we
can take whatever we want, want, we can blow up
whatever we want, but no, I.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
Love that.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
We'rethy f in the United States of America. We can
blow up anything we want, we can take anything we want,
we can do anything we want. He's just crazy enough
that he might but.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
He getting killed.
Speaker 4 (03:18):
We can blow up a lab, but nobody's going to
be in the lab, as opposed to everybody being in
the lab and blowing it up, right, two ways of
doing it.
Speaker 1 (03:27):
Yeah, well, we'll just wait to the lab close down.
You know they've gone, they've gone home for the night.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
Kaboom. Yeah.
Speaker 4 (03:35):
I told him this would be inappropriate to do right
now because we're very close to a solution. Now that
could change at any moment, could change with the phone.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
He could change any moment, could change with a phone call.
Speaker 4 (03:47):
But right now, I think they want to make a deal,
and if we can make a deal, they save a
lot of lives.
Speaker 2 (03:55):
I actually believe him about that. Now.
Speaker 1 (03:59):
I don't mean to. I don't leave him about other things,
but I think right there, I think he is genuinely
saying I would prefer that we get a deal with
the Iranians and not go blow the S word out
of them right now. But what's my rule about butts?
(04:19):
You pay attention to what is said or written after
the butt. So now we have at least as of
last night, we've got multiple reports. They're saying that US
officials have told have been told that Israel Is fully
ready to launch an operation against the Iranians if required,
(04:42):
and that Washington expects those retaliations against our sites in Iraq.
Now why would they if the Iranians, I mean, if
the Israelis attack Iran's nuclear facilities, They've already already wiped
out the air force. So now you about their nuclear
nuclear program, Why would the Israeli the why would the
(05:06):
Iranians attack Americans? Because if the is the Israeli did,
Israelis have done it because this would if we were
to react to the Iranians attacking us, that would get
the Iranians what they want, uh wore, a broader war.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
In the Middle East. So why why is all this
going on?
Speaker 1 (05:34):
Well, the trigger is is the growing stockpile the Uranians
have of near weapons grade uranium and its preparations. They
had been doing preparations for potential retaliation strikes against Israel,
and of course we've had this breakdown in the progress.
The talks themselves haven't broken down, but in the nuclear
(05:55):
talks that they've pretty much come to a to a halt. Meanwhile,
in Gaza, we've forget about Gaza because that's that's part
of the whole jigsaw puzzle too.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
So, while while these.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
Idiot Western commentators obsess over supposed Israeli crimes in Gaza,
Hamas deliberately attacks the convoy of humanitarian aid workers, killing
and injuring those delivering life saving relief. There was a
all over X yesterday. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is reporting that.
(06:29):
So the entire region seems to be moving to dangerous thresholds.
While there are too many in the West that cling
to I think are delusional storylines and some sort of
moral theater. Why don't we always have this moral theater
that is always to the detriment of Israel. Well, anyway,
I don't think that moral theater can hide the facts.
(06:52):
US embassies across the Middle East, Eastern Europe, North Africa
have been all ordered to convene emergency action committees and
report their risk mitigation measures back to DC. That was
reported by the Washington Post, and that led little Marco.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
Isn't he been amazing?
Speaker 1 (07:11):
I think Senator Rubio, Secretary of Rubio, has been an
absolutely amazing Secretary of State. Anyway, he was the one
that authorized the departure of non essential personnel in Iraq.
A senior diplomat in the region said this, we are
(07:32):
constantly assessing the appropriate personnel posture at all of our embassies. True,
based on our latest analysis, we decided to reduce the
footprint of our mission in Iraq. We are watching and worried.
We think it's more serious than any other time in
the past. Well, our preparations and European preparations are beginning
(08:00):
to accelerate. But before we get there, when I talk
about this moral theater that we're playing in this little
Richard Haass Richard Haas over at MSNBC this morning said.
Speaker 3 (08:18):
This for Jonathan, at the moment, you can prepare for
military action in stays Israel, and that also can be
supportive of the negotiations. It focuses the Iranians on the
alternative to a negotiation, and you can also be preparing
for military actions. I do not think the Israelis would
use military for US over American objections.
Speaker 2 (08:38):
I am to disagree with him.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
I think that Netanyahu would confer with Trump and Trump
can try to persuade him not to. But if I've
ever learned to understand anything about the Israelis and y'ah
Who in particular, is that they will and should, in
(09:05):
my opinion, do whatever it takes to protect their country.
They build walls, they destroy their enemies, and they take
political risks doing so, and they know very well the
political risks. I've told you before about one time when
(09:26):
I was we were down near the Gaza strip Net
and Yah who was running for prime minister, and there
were there were rocket attacks, rockets launched out of Gaza.
Nothing new, right, except that this was in the middle
of a political campaign. So Neat and Yahoo, I'm with
a group with a delegation from the US and nat
(09:48):
Yaho runs over the site to to to do a
press conference, and I'm sitting there with a member of
the Kanesset, and I'm asking all these questions about why
do you operate so quickly to clean things up? Because
(10:11):
we had also toured other areas that been hit by
rockets that had been cleaned. Now, later that evening, I
gave a keynote address to Hersleiya Conference, to the Hursleia
Security Conference in Hersleia, which is just south of Tel Aviv,
and in the Q and A section, I was asked
(10:32):
some question I forget something about American media, and my
response to them was, you know, I, as an American,
I don't understand why you're so quick to clean up
any damage caused by rockets coming out of Gaza. You
need to show the world what they're doing. And this
(10:57):
general from the idea. If stood up and said, essentially,
mister Secretary, with all due respect, the American media will
report whatever it wants to report regardless of whether we
show them we don't show them, Whether we clean it
up today or two weeks from now, it won't make
(11:19):
any difference.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
The New York.
Speaker 1 (11:21):
Times will still report that it was our fault. He
was essentially chewing me out. And I learned from that
moment in my discussions with him afterwards, that regardless of
what the Israelis do, the stupid position of most of
(11:42):
the world is Israel always wrong, their enemies always right.
So when Richard hass is trying to convince us that
the Israelis would use military that the Israelis would not
use military force over American objections, I think he's wrong.
Speaker 3 (12:03):
You know, if Donald Trump goes to Bving neatna.
Speaker 2 (12:05):
Who hold off.
Speaker 3 (12:06):
I simply do not believe any Israeli prime minister would
would would I militarily here, I just don't. I just
don't buy that. The consequences of that would be too great.
So I don't think we've yet reached that point. But yeah,
because also you saw the report from the nuclear so
called watchdogs the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran has gone
much farther down the path towards accumulating an enormous urani
(12:29):
enrich uranium stockpile. They are not that far from having
a significant capability. Uh So, I think whatever cliche you
want to is, yes, the is the clock is ticking.
But again, I simply don't see the israelis doing this
over American objections. But at some point, if this administration
gives up on the agreement on the negotiations.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
Uh huh.
Speaker 1 (12:50):
So when Trump says to the reporter in that earlier SoundBite,
I ask him to hold off for right now, and
then go on to talk about there may be a
time when the question then becomes is this that time they.
Speaker 3 (13:09):
May tell the Israel least fine, because they do not want,
for good reason, for Ron to have a multiple nuclear devices.
I think one big questions for the administration are they
willing to compromise at all on Iran's ability to have
any enriched uranium and right now?
Speaker 1 (13:26):
And I would say no, there is no reason at
all to give the uraniums the ability to enrich uranium
at all. And the reason for that is if they
want enriched uranium for a nuclear for a civilian nuclear
energy program.
Speaker 2 (13:45):
You can buy that all over the world.
Speaker 1 (13:48):
I forget what the levels are for the enrichment, but
the level that you need for nuclear reactors you can
buy on the open market. For the level of ris
that you need for a nuclear warhead, you have to
do that yourself. So when Trump says I don't want
them to have any capability, I believe him. I don't
(14:13):
think you should blow off Trump.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
In this regard at all.
Speaker 1 (14:19):
So when military preparations begin to accelerate, for example, the
naval support activity in Bahrain, which is home to our
Naval Forces Central Command, they're on high alert right now,
interacts and bar province increased military air activities being observed.
I think the US anticipates that Iranian retaliations against our
(14:41):
assets in Iraq would follow any Israeli strike. This concern
contributed to Washington's decision to advise some Americans yesterday to
leave the region. Now, the Iranian posture is also evolving
in parallel. The New York Times is reporting that the
(15:04):
Iranian military and government officials have already meant to discuss
the response to a potential Israeli strike. A senior Iranian
official told the New York Times that Tehran has prepared
a response plan involving an immediate counter strike on Israel
with hundreds of ballistic missiles. Well, fire up the Iron Dome,
(15:25):
get ready. So why all of a sudden it is
this happening. No, not because the rides in la No,
not because they're trying to just look at some other
shiny object. I think the catalyst is the developments in
(15:45):
Iran's nuclear program. If you dig deep enough, you'll find
that the IAEA has a report, you can find it
on the Reuter's website that Iran has amassed about more
than four hundred kilograms of uranium enriched enriched to a
(16:06):
percentage that's high enough and a quantity that is sufficient
enough for at least one nuclear weapon, assuming that it's
further refined. And ostensibly the other thing that I read
yesterday is the Uranians are prepared to launch a couple
of ballistic missiles sometime today with two ton warheads on them.
(16:30):
Now they're duds. But what are they doing. Well, they're
acting like Kim Jong un. Let's don't put any live
warheads on the missiles. Well, let's test the missiles with
two ton dud warheads to see if we can control
them and get them to go where we will them
to go. Now, North Korea wants them to go out
into the South China Sea, which is usually what happens,
(16:52):
but not always. I think the Uranians are doing exactly
the same thing. In France and Germany, they're known as
the E three. They've signaled they're ready to trigger the
UN snapback provisions to reapply the sanctions on Iran if
their nuclear program continues unchecked, and a lot of diplomats
(17:14):
are saying that could come as early as two weeks.
So I think they are probably diplomatic efforts that are continuing.
I'm sure Rubio and his team are doing everything they can,
but I've got the feeling that we've kind of reached
the point of no return. There is a sixth round
of direct talks that are scheduled for the coming days.
(17:37):
Two officials that confirm the CBS News that Stephen Mitcoff,
the US Special Envoy in the Middle East, is planning
to attend, So that's elevating the intensity of the talks.
Oil prices went up yesterday somewhere between four and five percent.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
That's the high level in two months. Why did you
do that?
Speaker 1 (18:03):
Oh, because Persian Gulf shipping lanes would be affected by
any military estallation. Get ready, so mentioning that oil prices
edged higher over the past week. But it's curious. I'm
(18:24):
always fascinated by why well West Texas Intermediate went from
sixty four forty one on June six to sixty six
thirty two a barrel as of closing last night, gain
of about three percent. And then Brent Crewde has been climbing.
(18:45):
It reached sixty seven dollars eighteen cents on June ten.
That was a three point four to two percent monthly increase.
So both of those benchmarks are still about seventeen to
eighteen percent below last.
Speaker 2 (18:59):
Year benchmark levels.
Speaker 1 (19:03):
So JP Morgan has been forecasting a despite a verry
sh outlook. JP Morgan's been forecasting Brent at sixty six
for this year and fifty eight dollars for twenty twenty six.
So what are the what are the factors? When I'm
(19:24):
looking late yesterday afternoon at these stories, I'm really trying
to understand what are all of the different factors that
are occurring to cause this volatility in the oil market,
because I there's it's easy to say that gas prices,
(19:45):
retail gas prices are down, and they are down, but
they're not nearly down as much as what I thought
they would be, primarily because we're still reading from a
over abundant money supply, and while inflation is not rampant,
(20:06):
we still get all we still get to get all
this money out of the system. But here what I
found to be I think the biggest factors in impacting
the crude markets, and I share these with you because
if something happens in the Middle East, OPEK, who is
(20:27):
currently trying to well, OPEC is kind of screwed up
right now. Some are overproducing, some are underproducing. But if
there is an Iranian attack, and whether it spreads or not,
because tankers don't want to run the risk of moving
a lot of movement of oil will stop in the
(20:48):
Middle East, and that will affect the overall international markets.
So what's happened in recent days, Well, don't forget, we
had that Ukrainian drone attack on Russian air basis back
in June eighth. That caused some some spikes, and Russia
still faces export constraints from sanctions. They've reported a thirty
(21:14):
five percent year over year revenue drop, so there's a
supply disruption there now. Quite honestly, as a footnote, if
if Trump can't get putin to really start taking cease
fire or even peace negotiations.
Speaker 2 (21:32):
Seriously.
Speaker 1 (21:34):
Cut them off, because even though they have a thirty
five percent year over year revenue drop, still that's still
how they're funding the war. So if you want to
stop the war, stop the money, just stop the supply
of money. Meanwhile, Reuters again reported last week that Iran's
(21:54):
rejection of this nuclear deal keeps its three point eight
million barrel per day output under sanctions, and that elevates
the risk, as I said, for the future disruptions of
its exports, and again I would add not just their exports,
but Saudi exports as well. Then you got the wildfires
(22:15):
up in Alberta noil SAMs production. That tightens the North
American supply.
Speaker 2 (22:23):
So you add all those up.
Speaker 1 (22:27):
Any hiccup in Russia, any hiccup in the Middle East,
and we've got refinery problems in this country. Suddenly any
hiccup on a refinery that goes offline because suddenly there's
some problem with it. You can't just in most refineries.
You can't just shut down one little portion of You
(22:48):
gotta shut the whole thing down. You got the US
China trade talks going on, which I think the optimism
about the US China trade talks is way over blown,
but the hope for which is why I just don't
really like the market. Although I'm in the market, hopes
(23:11):
for a US China trade agreement are lifting demand expectations,
so just the hope has an effect. Go back to
Reuters again, they pointed out that two days ago Trump
and President g may soon speak again and that boosted
(23:32):
Brent by almost three percent. China's importing eleven point three
million barrels a day last year, and they can see
that demand rebound if tariff's ease. JP Morgan says this
trade progress reduces the downside risk for oil. China's appetite
is critical, so hope is the strategy for the market,
(23:59):
and I don't know why, but again going to Reuters,
our crude inventories are shrinking reduced US production that Diamondback
Energy notes that they're Q two twenty five peak and
to decline to thirteen point three million barrels a day
(24:23):
by Q four of twenty twenty six. Inventory draws, again
from some expert in this field says that inventory draws
are a classic bullish signal. Yeah, I totally understand that.
And then you have OPEC the mixed signals. So OPEK said, hey,
(24:49):
we're going to increase our production because we're trying to
regain market share away from US producers. Yet they haven't
been able to do that. Their actual output flags some
members like iraqing UAE or overproducing, and others are planning
to offset their prior excesses. So OPEC right now is
(25:11):
kind of in a I don't know, a weird in
fighting for lack of a better term. So the bottom
line would be this, there's steady rise in West Texas
International and Bent over the past eight to ten trading days,
and that reflects a market balancing short term bullish catalyst
(25:32):
against a barish long term outlook. Now you throw into
that mix all the geopolitical risks that trade hopes, which
I find hilarious, and in inventory draws that dominate the upside.
But then OPEC plus supplying demand concerns, those will temper
the hope expectations on the longer term. And then you've
(25:54):
got Trump's energy policies. And what are Trump's energy policies? Well,
one is he's moving to kill the California EV mandate.
He will reportedly, I haven't been watching the TV, but
supposedly today he's going to revoke the state of California's
waiver under the Clean Air Act.
Speaker 2 (26:17):
Now why is that important?
Speaker 1 (26:18):
Because that serves as the foundation for California's EV targets.
The news stories say that he will sign a series
of three resolutions passed under the Congressional Review Act back
in April and May, which would remove California's ability to
enforce its mandates on both passenger cars and heavy trucks,
(26:42):
which Trump and other opponents refer to as the California
EV mandate. The resolution's target the California Air Resource Board,
that is one of the most Marxists centrally planned economic
controllers in the entire country. They've got something called the
(27:07):
Advanced Clean Cars Program, Advanced Clean Truck Rules. All these
different programs invoke incentives, escalate penalties, all designed to force
buyers to abandon the internal combustion cars and then have
to replace them with either evs or at least some
(27:27):
of the car that I don't know what it would be,
but that qualifies as a zero emission vehicle referred to
as a z as ZEV.
Speaker 2 (27:36):
Under this stupid program.
Speaker 1 (27:38):
Now I'm targeting California right now in this story because
Trump plans to target California. But what I'm i about
to tell you is mirrored in Colorado. California's program calls
for a thirty five percent adoption of zero emission vehicles
(27:58):
by next year, sixty eight percent by twenty thirty, and
one hundred percent by twenty thirty five. The market is
not there, and the state is already way behind the
needed pace of adoption. The California government it self reports
that as of the end of last year, only six
(28:21):
percent of the light duty cars on the road would
qualify under the mandate. And yet by twenty thirty five,
which just ten years away. They want to get to
one hundred percent. You're way behind schedule. This is stupid.
You're trying to mandate and force Americans into vehicles that
(28:43):
they don't want, that they can't afford, and you're ignoring
the realities of the grid and the supply chains. There
are all sorts of stories circulating around Colorado about.
Speaker 2 (28:57):
How bad our grid is right now, and yet Paulus.
Speaker 1 (29:01):
Continues to pursue this dream of zero emissions, you know,
by twenty fifty or whatever the stupid year is. So
you want you talk about volatility in the oil and
gas commodity market.
Speaker 2 (29:16):
Holy cow.
Speaker 1 (29:17):
And then you put on top of that all of
the stories circulating right now about the Iranians.
Speaker 2 (29:24):
Things are about to get weird.
Speaker 4 (29:26):
Hey, Michael, I can only imagine gangsters and thugs riding
around in EV's in California and Denver. That would be
hilarious to see.
Speaker 2 (29:35):
Have a good one. It would be hilarious, wouldn't it.
Speaker 1 (29:39):
So let's go back to California for a moment, because
in all this kerfuffle that's going on about Trump's actions
that he allegedly is going to take some time today.
In fact, I think I saw in the schedule. I
think there are maybe there's a bill signing this morning.
I think of that has already taken place, and I
(30:01):
think there's some executive orders and some other proclamations this afternoon,
So maybe sometime this afternoon he's going to do it.
But in response to these threats, I don't really consider
the threats.
Speaker 2 (30:16):
I think they're just wise policy decisions.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
The spokesperson for the Sierra Club said something that I
think is worth noting. And it's worth noting because the
Attorney General of California has threatened to sue the administration
if indeed they revoke all of these permits under the
Clean Air Act and essentially kill the California ev mandate. Well,
(30:40):
get in line ensue because your cohort, the Sierra Club,
pointed out that this is indeed a national federal issue.
She warned that the rollbacks quote will choke communities with
smog and worse than climate disasters. Then she stepped in
(31:05):
and when she said this, this isn't just about California,
it's about the eighty million Americans in states following our lead. Oh,
that seems to be an a mission against interest that
seems to be in amission that, oh, California is impacting
(31:26):
interstate commerce and is impacting a federal regulation by basically saying,
in our state, you can't do this or you have
to buy that. And people are saying, we don't want this,
we don't want it. So why should I be forced
(31:47):
not take me out of it? Why should any relative
of mine in Texas or Oklahoma or New Mexico or
anywhere else, or any of your relatives in any state
other than Colorado, because we're just following California's lead. Why
should we be forced that when we go to a
car dealership, say in twenty thirty five or twenty fifty,
our choices are so limited because of California's mandate, because
(32:11):
automobile manufacturers are going to one to what, oh, well,
we've got to comply with California. Okay, Well, let's just
you know, revamp the assembly line and we'll just start
putting out all these cars. Well, they can't sell them now,
and so it's just going to drive up the price
of internal combustion engines. There'll be more demand for that.
(32:33):
People will be willing to pay that higher price because
they don't want the EVS. How can I claim they
don't want the evs. Quarterly us like do the vehicle sales.
When it comes to hybrid electric now those these are
hybrid electrics. This is where you have a like. Can't
(32:54):
think of any models, but it's both gas and battery powered.
That counts for twelve percent of light duty vehicle sales.
That's not a bad number, right, But battery electric is
less than eight somewhere around seven percent, and plug in
hybrids are all the way down less than two percent.
(33:17):
And that's not dramatically changed over the past five years. Oh,
the hybrid electric's gone up significantly, but all the others
are beginning to drop. But I thought we live in
a free market economy. I thought we lived in a
country where I got to make the choice, and that
(33:39):
manufacturers of whatever the product is.
Speaker 2 (33:41):
I don't give a rat that's what it is.
Speaker 1 (33:42):
But whatever product they're manufacturing, they look at what the
market wants, or they may try to create a new
product and then convince me it's something that I do want. Well,
they've failed on both strategies. People don't want these, so
why should we be forced to buy them? You know,
(34:05):
as somebody said on the text line, kings would be
the one that would do those kinds of mandates. So
when Gavin Newsom or Jared Polus accused Donald Trump of
being a king, who really is the king or trying
to be a king? Newsom and Polis
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.