`

iran

Gridlock On The Border

Are both sides at fault for running to their corners instead of negotiating a deal to get humanitarian aid at the border? Is Beto O’Rourke playing politics with veteran’s issues? Are there too many Monday morning quarterbacks giving their misinformed analysis on how President Trump is handling Iran? Heritage Foundation's Lt. Col. James Carafano joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Brexit Disaster

Is the European Union scared to death of Brexit? If they ever figure out a Brexit deal, will the E.U. disintegrate or continue to limp along? Did the Iranians hack the midterm elections? Are we prepared to go to war with China? Former Department of Defense Undersecretary, Jed Babbin joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Trump’s Unshiny Foreign Policy Approach

How is it possible for two completely different spins after a U.S. intelligence briefing? Was there a legitimate threat from the Iranians against the U.S.? Is Trump and his foreign policy team more concerned about getting the job done rather than doing what the Washington bubble wants? National security expert, Lt. Colonel James Carafano joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Tightening Up On Our Enemies

Should President Trump increase sanctions on North Korea after their latest missile testing? Is there anything we can do in a humanitarian aspect to help the people in North Korea separate from the government? How many Russian troops are in Venezuela propping up Maduro? Is Trump doing the right thing with Iran and tightening the pressure on them? Former Special Forces officer and Pentagon official, Steven Bucci joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Global Threats

How can Biden dismiss the threat of China? Is it time to tighten up sanctions and even pass new ones on North Korea after their missile testing? Is it a good idea to send a U.S. bomber task force to the Middle East? Why is Trump having lengthy conversations with Putin? How can the U.S. stir up a revolution in Venezuela without putting our own troops on the ground? Former Pentagon official, Jed Babbin joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

National Security Concerns On The Ballot?

Should our national security and the way our leaders handle and define our enemies push voters to go out and vote Republican? Should we be encouraged by the Trump administration’s serious pressure on Iran? Is Trump making the right call sending troops to the border to counter the caravan? President of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, Cliff May joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Who Will Have The Last Laugh?

Was anyone laughing when Trump stated America is governed by Americans? Why is the left insulted by America First? What about Trump’s trade talk portion of the address? Has anyone received more federal/state money than Elon Musk? Chief Economist for CNN, Steve Moore joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Sanctions Strangling Iranian Economy

Will Trump’s sanctions against Iran be more effective than Obama’s “diplomacy?” Did Trump learn his lesson from the Helsinki summit? Did the U.S. gain anything out of it? What should America's involvement be in the unrest in Central America? Former U.S. Deputy Undersecretary of Defense and contributor to the Washington Times, Jed Babbin joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

CIA TV Talking Heads

Is Paul Ryan correct in saying that Trump is trolling people by targeting ex-CIA agents? Are Trump’s actions his way of draining the swamp or is it petty political retribution? Why is there more attention on the Twitter war between Trump and Rouhani than on the eloquent speech that Mike Pompeo delivered on Iran? Editor for National Review, Rich Lowry joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Who Are The Real Liars?

Fox News Contributor Juan Williams says Trump is lying about Iran. Is Netanyahu also lying about the information collected by the Israeli intelligence agencies exposing the Iran Deal? Or was Ben Rhodes lying when he boasted he created an echo chamber in the DC press corps to convince them the deal was a good idea? Juan joins Dan and Amy to discuss the specifics of the “lies.” 

Related Content

Promises Kept

Is there an opportunity for a revolution in Iran? Can a shared concern of Iran bring Middle Eastern countries together? Is America no longer leading from behind? President of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser joins Dan and Amy with reaction to Trump’s decision on the Iran deal.

Related Content

Iran Deal Proponents Caught Flat Footed

Trump made a great first step in getting rid of the largest state sponsor of terror in backing out of the Iran Deal. Why are we even having a debate over sanctions on Iran after Netanyahu exposed their lies and terrorist activities? Senior Editor at Washington Free Beacon, Bill Gertz joins Dan and Amy with reaction to Trump’s decision to back out of the Iran deal.

Related Content

Trump To Announce Decision On Iran Deal

Does Iran even want to stay in the deal? Is the U.S. finally done pretending Iran is our partner in peace? Is Trump’s foreign policy in the Middle East focused on protecting American interests rather than nation building? National Security Expert and U.S. Army veteran, Lt. Col. James Carafano joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Iran Nuclear Deal: Fix Or Nix?

Are we headed to a regional war in the Middle East? If those who signed on to the Iran nuclear deal knew Iran was lying, why did they agree to it in the first place? Was Netanyahu speaking to an audience of one (Trump)? Israeli Deputy Prime Minister, Michael Oren joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy. And we've talked about the last few days...Benjamin Netanyahu's remarkable presentation, and the Israeli Intelligence operation...about the Israeli Intelligence operation which secured all of this information from the Iranians about the extent of their nuclear program, and the depth of their lies about it. And certainly that is important to the consideration about what to do about that unholy deal that the Obama Administration negotiated with the Iranians, that as Ambassador Dermer mentioned, or described, didn't PREVENT a nuclear Iran, it provided a PATH to a nuclear Iran. And I don't know if you're familiar with this organization...I got turned on to it a few years ago, CAMERA, the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, is the name of the organization. And so I've been following it for some time, and it is really is remarkable just how skewed the DC Press Corps is with reporting on the Middle East, particularly as it pertains to Israel. Let me just give you one example, that's recent, the last 24 hours; The total blackout of Palestinian leader...bosses anti-Semitic rants. This week, he blamed the Holocaust, Abbas, and anti-Jewish programs throughout history...on Jews. He insisted in a televised speech that Jews were massacred because they were bankers who charged usury. (Jacobson: What?) I'm not kidding! That's Mahmoud Abbas in a televised speech, and there's barely any reporting on it! In addition to, frankly, the lethargy with which the DC Press Corps has reported on Netanyahu's presentation, the underlying substance of the presentation, all being dismissed and frankly, even the former Obama flaks responsible for it are kind of in conflict with one another, it's either "old information, we already knew that", or somehow it is not compelling enough for us to sort of unwind this deal that the Obama Administration caught with the Iranians. Well, for more on this topic and others, we're pleased and honored again to be joined by Michael Oren, who is a former Israeli Ambassador to the United States, now the Deputy Prime Minister. Michael Oren, thanks so much for joining us, appreciate it. Oren: Hi Dan, hi Amy! Good morning, Chicago! Proft: Good morning...thanks for joining us, appreciate it. So I guess take those arguments advanced by...opponents of Israel, or those that are proponents of the Iran Nuclear Deal, in whichever order you want, with respect to old information, or nothing that's so compelling that it should make us reconsider the deal that was cut. Oren: Well those that are proponents of the deal will say that they KNEW Iran was lying, that's why they had to cut the deal and have very intrusive inspections. But, that position raises some serious contradictions. One, if the inspections were so intrusive, how come they didn't discover an archive that's sitting in downtown Tehran in broad daylight? Two, if they knew Iran was lying, and one of the conditions of the nuclear deal was that Iran came clean on its nuclear program, and Iran DIDN'T come clean, and everyone knew that Iran didn't come clean, and everyone knew that Iran was lying, then that makes anyone who signed the agreement party to a lie, now doesn't it? And here are some of the more pressing issues. An Iranian regime that has no intention of making a nuclear bomb in the future does not keep the BLUEPRINTS for a bomb in a warehouse. You keep them in a warehouse because you plan to go BACK to the warehouse and build a bomb! And the people who think that Iran is lying and that's why they had to sign this agreement, and think that Iran is never gonna go back to building the bomb, then why would they put an end to the nuclear agreement? Why is there a sunset clause in this agreement, that says after seven years the agreement ends and Iran can go back to enriching uranium. Why would they do that if they KNEW that Iran is lying about its military nuclear program? Nothing, nothing about it makes sense, Dan! And it makes sense...it lacks sense in a way that is exceedingly dangerous for Israel, the Middle East, and the world. Jacobson: Well, it's amazing to me how you were able to get all that information, and when Benjamin Netanyahu presented it, it was very powerful, it was very precise, but it seemed like he was focusing on an audience of one, and that was President Trump. So was he effective? Oren: I think he was effective. You know, I've heard this often, that he has an audience of one...I think he has audiences around the world, I think the Europeans are starting to ask serious questions now, they've all asked Israel to look at this information, it has shaken them up. But I think it was more than...I think President Netanyahu was speaking to the American people. And I don't think the American people enjoy having the wool pulled over their eyes, and to be lied to, okay? I don't think they appreciate that, particularly when the issue here is not just pride, it's national security. And if President Trump decides to either cancel this agreement or change it in very fundamental ways, I think he'll be responding to a groundswell of opinion in HIS country, not just in ours. Proft: I want to go back to some of what Ambassador Rod Dermer had to say. One of the points he made, and I thought it was a salient one, was it's not just the cash that Iran got upfront in this deal, the unfreezing of accounts, it's also the ability to sell oil on the open market, that's about a $35B a year cash cow for the Iranians. And I wonder what Israelis' (sic) position is with respect to just the nuclear deal and unwinding that, but with respect to sanctions on Iran to try and cut off some of their money supply. Oren: Well, it's excellent. And what brought it onto the table to begin with was punishing sanctions. They should have been made MORE punishing, and they would have kept Iran at the table until we had a deal that actually responded to the threat, and eliminated the threat. The deal...it was a bonanza for Iran! It gave Iran legitimacy, they could conquer a chunk of the Middle East, they could kill hundreds of thousands of Syrians, and nobody protests! Except for Israel, the United States, and Arab countries. Nobody in the world seemed to mind. And it gave the Iranians MONEY, lots of money, to carry out these conquests, to carry out these massacres...unconscionable. And one of the craziest things, I must tell you, the Iranians are using this money to ETHNICALLY CLEANSE Syria of Sunni Arabs. The money is coming from Europe! And where are the Sunni Arabs going? They're going TO Europe. So the Europeans are funding their own demographic disaster. It's extraord...that's what greed will give ya. Proft: *sighing exasperatedly* Oren: But since you asked Dan, I think the Iranian economy is already REELING from the possibility that President Trump might pull out of this agreement, and let's see what happens to that economy if he does. Proft: Sticking in the region, but on the other side of the isle, the Saudis, the king-to-be of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salam, was in New York recently, meeting with Rabbis as well as Catholic leaders, an interfaith dialogue. Characterize the importance of that meeting and this future king of Saudi Arabia, how does he play into stability in the region, are we really seeing a watershed moment in the history of Saudi Arabia with his ascension? Oren: Well, I can't comment on the meeting per se, but like I say, I can say this; that, well, President Obama sought to bring Jews and Arabs closer together through peace. He succeeded in bringing us closer together, but not through peace, brought together by common concern over his policies, particularly over Iran. And today there is a greater meeting of the minds between Israel and the nations of the Guv...of the Gulf region, Tikrit, Saudi Arabia. We agree ON Iran, we agree on Syria, we agree on Assad and the Islamic Brotherhood and ISIS, we agree on pretty much everything. And the Saudis, at least implicitly if not publicly yet have come to see us as not an enemy country, but an ally and an ally that is vital not just for their security, but the security of the entire region. Proft: There's been reported strikes...and I don't know that you can confirm or deny this...but reported Israeli strikes on Iranian bases in Syria in the last few weeks. And it's fueled speculation on whether or not this could precipitate a regional war, or whether it can be contained in Syria. How would you characterize the Syrian problem, and the Iranian influence in Syria? Oren: Well, we certainly don't want a war. We're going to do whatever is necessary to DEFEND ourselves. The bottom line about Syria is that Iran is determined to transform Syria into a militarized front against us, to establish military bases, ports, airfields in Syria, and Israel has drawn red lines. And they are VERY red. We will stop them. They try to build a port, try to build a base, try to introduce advanced precision missiles into Syria, we're going to have to stop them. Iran...the end of the day it's going to be Iran's choice, but this country will do whatever is necessary to defend ourselves. Jacobson: What's the timeline for President Trump to make a decision? Oren: His timeline is May 12th. He announced on May 12th he would make a decision about the Iran deal. He said he will either nix it, rescind it, or fix it. Now, our preference is to have it fixed, but the fixtures have to be very substantive and specific. We need to have punishing sanctions on Iran's missile program, we need to have unlimited and unfettered inspections of the Iranian military sites, and the most important thing, Dan and Amy, is we have to remove those sunset clauses, that says that after seven years, these restrictions on Iran Nuclear program get removed and Iran can go back to enriching uranium. THAT...that is our essential, and I think we have a very close meeting of the minds on these points with the Administration. Proft: He is former Israeli Ambassador to the United States, now Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Michael Oren, thank you so much for joining us, appreciate your insights. Oren: Have a VERY good day, thank you! Jacobson: Thank you! And he joined us on our Turnkey Dot Pro Answer Line.

Related Content

Path To Peace Or Dancing With Disaster In Iran?

Is the time ticking for Trump to decide on the Iran deal? Are skeptics of Netanyahu suggesting he’s trying to distract from his own problems and persuade Trump to launch into war with Iran? Is it too early to hand out a Nobel Peace Prize for Trump’s efforts in the reunification of the Koreas? Resident Scholar for the American Enterprise Institute, Michael Rubin joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

“Mission Accomplished” In Syria?

Can the latest chemical attack in Syria serve as an opportunity for the Trump Administration to reach out to its European allies to begin isolating the Iranian regime? What happened to the commitment to defund Planned Parenthood from Congressional Republicans? What’s the path to victory in 2018 for Republicans in the 6th Congressional District? Rep. Peter Roskam joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Trump’s New Foreign Policy Team

Was it a power play by the Chinese in scheduling a meeting with the North Koreans? Did the Iran deal set a bad precedent and lead North Korea into thinking they could get away with a similar agreement? Is it time to put more financial pressure on Russia? Senior Editor for the Washington Free Beacon, Bill Gertz joins Dan and Scot to discuss.  

Related Content

Trump Taking A Harder Line Against Russia

After expulsion of Russian diplomats, maybe Trump isn't Putin's man in DC after all? Is there a disconnect between Trump’s language regarding Russia and actual policies put in place? With Bolton and Pompeo now in the picture, should we be expecting a harder line against Iran and a step closer out of the Iran deal? AEI scholar, Gary Schmitt joins Dan and Scot to discuss.

Related Content

Will The Olympics Lead To Denuclearization?

Did John Bolton’s mustache prevent him from being on the NSA? Should the world be more worried about North Korea potentially selling their nuclear technology to other bad actors? What is the general assessment of the Trump’s realist foreign policy agenda so far? Should everyone’s New Year’s resolutions be to avoid non-stories in mainstream media and focus on real-life events happening? Former US Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy. And well, there were a number of interesting excerpts from Michael Wolff's book "Fire and Fury", which has created a furor inside the Beltway. And among the subjects that were discussed in the excerpts that were released, personnel decisions in the early days of the Trump administration, conversations that were alleged to have occurred between Steve Bannon and Roger Ailes, formerly the head of Fox News, was at the time, about particularly foreign policy and national security posts, including national security adviser. And one of the names mentioned by Ailes was former US ambassador to the UN, John Bolton. But Steve Bannon worried about his physical appearance... Jacobson: Like Steve Bannon should be talking? I mean, "Sloppy Steve", according to one of President Trump's tweets? Proft: Well, see...I don't think Steve Bannon was up for NSA, but Bannon suggested that one John Bolton didn't look the part, according to the President, because of the signature mustache. Jacobson: The mustache makes the man! Please! Proft: Okay! Well John Bolton certainly thinks that! And we're pleased to be joined by our friend, former ambassador to the UN, John Bolton. Ambassador Bolton, thanks so much for joining us, appreciate it. Bolton: Yeah, and what a WONDERFUL morning, right? Jacobson: Yeah, how are you doing? Proft: Yeah, nobody likes to be criticized about their fashion sense, yours truly included. But, how did you react to that excerpt? Did you kind of laugh at it, or did it ring true to you? Bolton: Guys look, at this point....no, at this point, what else are you gonna do? And I just want to say, for those of you who watch The Kennedy Show on Fox Business Network, comes on normally in the 8 o'clock hour, I was on last night, and Kennedy gave a ROUSING endorsement to my mustache...so I told her I'm sure that would put me in great standing with the president. Proft: Well I mean, if she endorses it, then I say you keep it. Bolton: Right? What else do you need to know, right? Jacobson: But so, I mean...do you think that you did not get the position because President Trump does not like facial hair? We're not dealing... Bolton: I don't think so. You know, people should remember his father had a mustache, so unless you're, you know, deeply into Freudian stuff, I think this is all *Proft laughs over a few words* at this point. Proft: Alright, alright, alright, enough mustache talk. Jacobson: The silliness aside... Bolton: I'll be happy to continue on this stuff. Proft: Yeah, we'll be happy to get to the reason we have you on, and that's what's going on between your ears, your knowledge of geo-political matters. So let's start with Iran, and what you think the prospects are for...to borrow a phrase...regime change, with the protests that are rolling through the streets...and not just of Tehran? Bolton: Well, it's a very significant development, what's going on in Iran, and something that I think is a direct threat to the regime of the Ayatollah is what was called "The Green Movement" in 2009, when they were protesting the obviously fraudulent presidential elections that kept Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in office. There, the protests were just which candidate of the regime would take over. There's no opposition to the regime as such, at least none that was publicly visible. What we see now in these demonstrations, which are taking place in over 100 cities across Iran, is they are chanting "Death to Khamenei", the Supreme Leader, "Down with the Regime!" Now, this particular round of demonstrations may end, it may be repressed, but a line has been crossed here. And I think the regime is in trouble, I think it's much more fragile than its international appearance. I mean, you've got decades of economic mismanagement, I think that's where many of these protests get started, you've got nearly 70% of the population is under 30...they know they could lead a very different life. They can see it across the Gulf in Doha, Dubai and Abu Dhabi, they can see it on the internet. And there's enormous tension in the different ethnic groups in Iran. Persians are only 50% of the population. So there's a lot going on, and as I say, whatever happens with the current round of demonstrations, I think this is torqued up to a new level of threat to the regime. Jacobson: Do you think that President Trump should have inserted himself in supporting the protesters in his tweets? Bolton: Absolutely! I think that, number one, it was important to show, yet again, that Barack Obama is no longer President. A lot of people in foreign countries that don't know anything about the American political system, no reason that they should, they sort of assume one President's pretty much like another. That's obviously not the case as we understand, but I think it is important for the President to stand up and be clear about where the sympathies of our country lie. And there's a very direct analogy to some of the strong statements that Ronald Reagan made about the Soviet Union during the last days of the Cold War, when he called the Soviet Union "the evil empire", not Natan Sharansky and other dissidents inside prison camps. Many of them inside the Soviet Union said they heard Reagan, they heard other statements like that, and it gave them strength, it lifted their morale, it said "somebody on the outside understands what we're going through here", and it gave them...helped them increase the will to continue, it boosted their courage. So I think it's important that...that he did it, and that it was the right thing to do. Proft: The President's taken some heat this week for a tweet about how big his button is, in respect to Kim Jong Un's button in North Korea. You know, a little bit of hysteria from the DC Press Corps, that's nothing new, suggesting he's, you know, engaged in nuclear brinkmanship. I thought that tweet was kind of a little gratuitous and unnecessary, but the larger point about the Trump administration's position on North Korea consistent with the principled realist approach they are taking to geo-politics. Bolton: Well I think the Trump administration inherited very bad options from its predecessors. North Korea's made tremendous progress towards having the capability to deliver thermonuclear weapons to any target they want, really, around the world, but particularly in the United States. So he's had to try, in a very short period of time to identify policies that will put a lot more pressure on North Korea, whether it's through China, or greater sanctions. I don't think North Korea's ever going to voluntarily give up its nuclear weapons program, especially given how close it is to achieving something it's been after for 30 years. You know, we weren't able to pressure or talk them out of the program in the last 30 years, why did anybody think in the last six, nine, twelve months, they're certainly gonna say "Oh, well, we got 99% of the way there, but I guess we'll stop now." It's not gonna happen! So, unless you're prepared to see North Korea with nuclear weapons forever, you've got some pretty tough options you've got to look at. Not that anybody wants to see military force used, but just think about what it's like to live in a world where Kim Jong Un DOES have his finger on the button. And beyond that, can sell his nuclear technologies to Iran, to terrorist groups, to other would-be aspiring nuclear powers. So, you know, it's a desperate situation with respect to the threat of North Korea, but it also represents, potentially, the crashing and burning of 50 years or more of American counterproliferation policy, the effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. Because North Korea's success here would prove that if you just have the determination and the patience, you too can be a nuclear weapon state. That's a very bad lesson to be learned around the world. Jacobson: Well,we've the Olympics, in about 32 days they begin, and that hotline between North and South Korea has been re-opened, and they have a big conversation coming up January 9th. Do you think the Olympics could help lead to any type of denuclearization? Bolton: No, this is complete propaganda! And remember that in 2000 and 2004, the North and South Korea Olympic teams marched together under one flag, as I recall. During the presidential administrations in South Korea, Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun, two presidents who had the same view, they called it the "Sunshine Policy"...that's sweet...about how to deal with North Korea. And it failed then, and it will fail now. The reason I think the North has opened this up is to distract attention, so that now people talk about "Oh, the Olympic Games!" In the meantime, their nuclear scientists and their ballistic missile technicians are working overtime to complete what they need to do to have that delivery capability. So you know, this is kind of a bait and switch affair for the North Koreans, they've got it in their playbook, they roll it out whenever they need to, and we shouldn't be suckered by it. Proft: Just thinking about the first year of the Trump administration, and they're basically encyclical describing the principled realist approach to foreign policy. You know, essentially...reducing the budget of the UN, pulling back foreign aid to Pakistan, supporting freedom protesters in Iran, marginalizing ISIS, new sanctions on Russia. For all of the talk about feckless foreign policy, or "he's in over his depth in respect to all of these complicated international matters," seems like that there is kind of a consistent thread that's emerging, consistent with how they've described their approach to all of these countries, whether they're allies of convenience or open hostile countries. And I just wonder what your general assessment of the administration and his national security team is, a year in? Bolton: Yeah, I mean there's a long list of things; recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capitol, and the national security statement is, as you mentioned...but all of these things, I think, are in the mainstream of conservative Republican foreign policy. So you get the media that gets its hair on fire each morning with a couple of tweets that come out, when you look at, as you say, almost exactly a year's worth of policy, and it would be hard to distinguish what Trump is doing in the White House from what Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush would have done in the White House. So, you know, it's hard...it's hard not to kind of react when the media gets on a tear, but I'm just steeling myself, I'm kind of working on my self-discipline, just to continue to ignore what the mainstream media say and just actually focus on real events in the real world, not what's in the newspapers or what's on NBC, ABC, and CBS. Proft: A good New Year's Resolution for us all. He is former US ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, Ambassador Bolton, thanks for joining us, appreciate it. Bolton: Oh, great to be with you, thanks for having me!

Related Content

Iranian Protesters Chant For “Bread, Jobs, And Liberty”

Who's on the invite list for Nikki Haley's party? Is the UN having trouble hiding their blatant anti-Israel/anti-semitic beliefs? Is all foreign aid from the US moving forward going to have strings attached, especially to those nations who have proven to be the worst defenders of religious freedom? Is the leftist media missing out on covering the powerful protests in Iran to showcase Muslims who are advocating for freedom against an oppressive theocratic regime? President of the Islamic Forum for Democracy, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser joins Dan and Amy to discuss. 

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy. So, so...how big...is it...Mr. President? How big is it, Mr. President? ...you're supposed to do that in your Marilyn Monroe... Jacobson: Oh, that's right. *Monroe impression* How big is it, Mr. President? Proft: You know, the button. Jacobson: Yeah, the button. He tweeted last night that Kim-Jong-un (sic) said "the button is on his desk at all times. Will someone from his depleted and food-starved regime please inform him that I too have a nuclear button, but it is much bigger, a more powerful button than his, and my button works!' Exclamation point. Proft: ...yeah. Jacobson: Wow. Proft: Torrent of... Jacobson: Yes, a torrent... Proft: Torrent of tweets yesterday from the President... Jacobson: He's gonna be handing out the most dishonest and corrupt media awards of the year on Monday at 5 o'clock! Proft: Oh, I'll set my watch accordingly. Subjects will cover dishonesty and bad reporting in multiple categories. Oh boy, it's a run up to the Oscars. Jacobson: Mmhmm. He's gonna hand out a Fake News Trophy. Proft: So yeah, the North Korea tweet is sort of silly and juvenile. I don't get it. More interesting to me is the party that Nikki Haley's throwing, and if you condemn the United States, you're not invited. You don't get to come to Nikki Haley's party. Nikki Haley, to thank the 65 countries that did NOT support a resolution condemning President Trump's position on Jerusalem, recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital, having a little party. But the 9 countries that voted...well the 9 countries that voted against the resolution, 35 abstained, and 128 nations voted in favor of it, so most of the world not invited. For more on these geopolitical matters, we're pleased to be joined by our friend, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, President of the Islamic Forum for Democracy, co-founder of the Muslim Reform Movement, former US Navy Lieutenant...Lieutenant Commander, excuse me...and author of the book "A Battle for the Soul of Islam", Dr. Jasser, thanks for joining us again, appreciate it. Jasser: Oh it's great to be with you again, Happy New Year! Proft: Happy New Year! What about the recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital, and the reaction that has ensued, at the UN and also majority Muslim countries around the world? Jasser: Well, I think it serves to show quite a bit that basically the recognition of what's been a fact in Israel, that Jerusalem is their capital, their connect (?) is there, their Supreme Court, ministries are all there. But yet we continue for decades to have had campaign rhetoric never bear out during the administration, be it Bush, Clinton, Obama, any administration. And now finally, President Trump has made the words of his campaign a reality and we recognize the capitol. And I think what's happening is we've taken off the table something that should have never BEEN on the table, which is the recognition of a capitol, the fact that Israel can declare its own capitol. And the bottom line is it should have never been on the peace table because it is not up for negotiation. We will never give in on letting Israel declare its own capital. And there's a lot of confusion happening in the Middle East...intentionally, that this isn't about East Jerusalem, it's about West Jerusalem. And yet, Turkey and other Islamist regimes are trying to exploit this, to say this is anti-Islam, etc. In the end I think this will help the peace process, eventually, because it will take off the table something that should have never been on, and let them get to the brass tacks of what are the real...what the other real issues are in this crisis? Jacobson: Well, if this is such a good idea, where are such a number of our allies against it? France, Germany...I mean the list goes on and on? Jasser: Because they have for long been having this kind of inferiority complex to the Islamic governments, where they have a veto in the UN. Why for so long has the UN had so much of its time exploited on issues related to Israel, when there are real human rights issues in Iran, and Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere? That's because the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, based out of Saudi Arabia, loves to demonize the other, and there's no simpler way to do it than to demonize the Jewish State, and it's all based on anti-Semitism with the...the State Department itself has called it the new anti-Semitism, which is a couching of anti-Israel rhetoric into what is really anti-Semitism. Proft: Yeah, and frankly you're hearing from Jewish leaders in places like Germany and western Europe about the rise of anti-Semitism there, to your point, Dr. Jasser. What about, on a related topic, the saber rattling of the President on funding for Palestinians, on funding foreign aid for Pakistan? Jasser: Well, it's amazing to me that we've never had this conversation before! Which is we hand a billion dollars to Egypt, we hand a billion dollars to Pakistan, and Hamas and other areas in which these enemies of America end up using our money to spread ideologies that threaten us, and yet we never make them pay a price. I sit on the US Commission for Religious Freedom, and every year we list the countries that are the worst offenders of religious freedom, and there's statutes in Congress, put in place to impose sanctions, yet every the White House...Obama, and Bush before him, put in waivers to allow Saudi Arabia and other nations to bypass those sanctions, because of stability and other security issues, when in fact the classic instability was regimes that had ideologies that run anathema to our own security! So I think it's about time for us to say "You know what? The blank check is not going to be written anymore, and if you're going to get aid from the United States, it's going to come with strings attached, which are sharing our values, and at least endorsing human rights in your own country." Jacobson: We normally...I mean, history proves we pay for...I mean, we pay our enemies so we can maintain peace. Don't you agree? Jasser: Well, I think that's a facade. To say that they maintain peace, that's sort of the albatross that they put over our heads and say "Well if you don't do this, we're going to do X Y and Z," when in fact they need us a lot more than we need them. And the only downside to this may be oil crises...bottom line is even at the height of our relationship with Pakistan, they were still harboring bin Laden and others, so this is often a deception, that will, I think, if you push them forward on it, may have a few little skirmishes here or there, but at the end of the day...they need us a lot more than we need them. Proft: Obama's friends in Iran...you know, the Ayatollahs? Are they in danger of being felled, in your opinion, by a popular revolt? Jasser: I pray so. I think there'd be nothing better as you and I have talked before, than some disruption in the Middle East, and especially you will see the connections that Iran has with Hezbollah, Syria Assad, and Yemen, and across the region as they become more inwardly focused, and for hopefully this Arab Spring now becoming a Persian Spring. We have a President now that is, at least rhetorically, defending them, which can actually go a long way. You'd be surprised how long seeing America and our leadership from the UN, with Nikki Haley and President Trump saying "we have their backs"...this is a very different revolt than in '09. '09 was simply in Tehran. This one is in 20 different cities, and it's focused in the cities were the theocrats and the Supreme Council are based, which is in Qom and other major cities. So, as long as this doesn't fizzle out with some of the human rights abuses that are happening in the past couple of days, with police tanks beginning to mow over people, if this can continue I think it may be the beginning of the end for the Islamic Republic. Jacobson: Well for those who don't know, what's life like in Iran? They're talking about how people are hungry for food and for freedom, but inflation is through the roof. Can you just describe what life is like? Jasser: That's a great question. Because people say "Oh, this is just simply about, you know, technical issues." No! The chanting for the most part has been about bread, jobs, and liberty. They have no ability to express themselves. Two days into this revolt, the internet has been turned off, women are hit on their ankles if their dresses...if their skirts are above their ankles, they aren't allowed to go out on the street if they aren't wearing a hijab, gays are thrown from the roof, you can't be publicly homosexual, or have any type of speech which is critical of Islam, or of the government, so from free speech to the ability to make money...they saw billions coming into the government over the last two years after Obama handed back $150 billion and they're saying in their chants that they see NONE of that. And that's why they're no longer saying "Death to America" or "Death to Israel", they're saying "Death to the regime, death to the dictator, and death to Hezbollah!" Which I think, if you want to...I am SO disappointed at the left media, the New York Times and the CNN and ABC, they're covering it just a little bit...but what better image do you want for Americans to abandon this concept that all Muslims are Islamists than to see tens of thousands of Muslims chanting these slogans, which will forever put away these stereotypes that we're all Islamists or theocrats? Proft: Yeah, that's an excellent point. Domestically, in the first quarter of this year, immigration policy is going to be central to the political discussion in DC, with respect to the DACA Program, and what the President will want in exchange, both in respect to border security on the country's southern border as well as this issue of sanctuary city and sanctuary state designations, localities and even some states, like Illinois, like California, refusing to work with Federal Immigration Enforcement. What do you think a sensible compromise on these issues...where the President has indicated he's WILLING to compromise on DACA...what do you think that looks like? Jasser: Well I really think the sensible policy is really what the President has been articulating over the past few weeks; we build the wall, we stop the sieve, and then we also begin to compromise on what we do with the 11 million or more folks that are here illegally, and perhaps allow DACA to exist. So, you know, you have to have a compromise there, and also in immigration we need to begin to have an ideological vetting and that...it's not a right to come to the US, these diversity programs or lotteries...it should not be random as to who comes to the United States. It should be those who are seeking American freedom, American principles, that share our social contract. It was bizarre to see Tim Kaine tweet today "Well, if we opened and allowed immigration from Iran, that would somehow...that would support the Iranian people." Huh? That doesn't make any sense! You support those who share our values, but they're trying to fix their OWN country, it's not about coming to the United States. And those who do need to escape, from places like Syria and elsewhere, where they've had no other option, then we need to vet against jihadists and Islamic etc. There needs to be a whole-of-government approach to where we don't just say "Well yes, maybe they need some human rights solution," but that human rights solution has to be married to a sharing of our values. We can't bring in Communists and other types of idealogues that don't share our values. And the immigration reform has to include that. I mean still today, the immigration paperwork asks you "Are you or have you ever been a supporter of the Communist Party?" That made sense during the Cold War, and we need to impose similar types of restrictions in this global war against jihad. Proft: Alright, he is Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, President of the Islamic Forum for Democracy, co-founder of the Muslim Reform Movement, former US Navy Lieutenant Commander, and the author of the book "A Battle for the Soul of Islam", Dr. Jasser, thanks for joining us again, appreciate it. Jasser: Thank you, appreciate being on.

Related Content