Raging Moderates: A Shaky Ceasefire (ft. Rep. Jim Himes)

Scott and Jessica talk through the aftermath of the weekend’s airstrikes in Iran — the lack of coordination in the lead-up, differing accounts of the damage, and confusion about a ceasefire. They’re joined by Rep. Jim Himes, Ranking Member on the House Intelligence Committee, to discuss possible consequences for Iran’s regime, citizens, and nuclear capabilities. Plus: Trump publicly lashes out at Israel, Iran, and… one of the hosts of Raging Moderates. Follow Jessica Tarlov, @JessicaTarlov. Follow Prof G, @profgalloway. Follow Raging Moderates, @RagingModeratesPod. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:01Speaker 00

  This episode is brought to you by Google Chrome. You think you know a browser, but Gemini and Chrome? That's new. It can help you with practically anything on the web, like restoring a vintage motorcycle from a 50-page restoration block, or finally break down that long article you've had open for weeks. Gemini and Chrome is here for it. Ready to make anything online make sense? There's no place like Chrome. Check responses set up required. Compatibility and availability varies 18 plus.

• 0:27Speaker 01

  Your vehicle doesn't just get you from here to there. It's a bridge to the people and places that matter most. It's how you show up for your family, your community, and everyone else that depends on you. That's why for 125 years, Firestone has been building tires with one thing in mind: to deliver products that are as reliable as you are. Firestone, always dependable, since 1900.

• 0:57Speaker 02

  Hogging seats on a crowded train, not saying "excuse me", watching videos on your phone with no headphones in. Sometimes it feels like we don't know how to act anymore. What we have been seeing increasingly is people breaking rules. Why should I play by the rules if nobody else is going to do that for me? This week on Explain It To Me, how to mind your manners. New episodes, Sundays, wherever you get your podcasts.

• 1:29Scott Galloway?

  Welcome to Raging Moderates. I'm Scott Galloway.

• 1:31Jessica Tarlov?

  And I'm Jessica Tarlov.

• 1:32Scott Galloway?

  Okay, Jess, in today's episode of Raging Moderates, we're discussing the aftermath of Trump's strikes in Iran and how we got to a ceasefire, and then how we didn't. First, we're fortunate to have Congressman Jim Himes, the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, joining us to break down the latest developments. Representative Himes, I very much appreciate you being here. Welcome to the show. Thanks for having me. So why don't we just start off with your view of the state of play here? Can you break down the latest developments in the Middle East for our listeners?

• 2:02Speaker 05

  Yeah, well, we're in a real roller coaster ride, right? We heard of the ceasefire last night and then apparently the ceasefire was violated and the president got very, very angry on social media and now we may or may not be on a ceasefire. Look, a couple of big picture things that we shouldn't lose sight of. Number one, we went into a war in the Middle East without any congressional deliberation and that is not according to the law, either the Constitution or the War Powers Act. And it's also not very smart, right? And, you know, an awful lot of people are saying, well, presidents have done this forever and that, you know, fair enough, that doesn't make it okay. And I'm a big believer that Congress ought to actually abide by the Constitution. But the other thing I would point out is that, you know, Bill Clinton sending limited,

• 2:46Speaker 05

  you know, cruise missile strikes into Somalia or a president putting a few ground forces on the ground in Syria is not playing anywhere near the order of magnitude of what it means to take an offensive strike in an area where you have 40,000 troops, where if things go wrong, gasoline prices could, you know, go to six or $7 a gallon. This was an instance in which there should have been some consideration. Now, where are we? Thank God that it would appear that from a tactical standpoint, the military strike was successful in as much as it created a lot of big explosions and everybody got home safe. What we don't know, and this is the question of the day really, is whether this meaningfully set back Iran's nuclear program.

• 3:30Speaker 05

  I can't get into details for obvious reasons, but I see absolutely no evidence that this did anything other than slow the Iranians' roll a little bit, a little bit. And so in the coming days and weeks, we're going to grapple with the possibility that the Iranians are still in a position to do a pretty quick breakout for a nuclear weapon and what is going to be the Israeli response to that and what is going to be the American response to that if in fact that turns out to be true.

• 3:56Jessica Tarlov?

  Vice President J D Vance sat down with Bret Baer on Special Report on Monday night, and Bret asked him about this and said, "Well, aren't you concerned about the fact that they were able to relocate the 60% enriched uranium that it could fit in?" I think it was 10 trunks of cars. And because President Trump seemed to be telegraphing a lot of what was going on, that they were actually given enough time to be able to do that. And J D Vance basically poo-pooed it and said, "That doesn't really matter." I assume your assessment is that it does matter, that they were able to get the uranium out and that they could start their project over, essentially?

• 4:32Speaker 05

  It's inconceivable to me that somebody with the brains of J D Vance would say that if the Iranians were able to get all of their 60% enriched uranium out, that that wouldn't matter. That's just insane. Obviously, if they retain that 60% uranium, they have and some centrifuges, and it's very, very unlikely that these raids obliterated, to use J D Vance's word, all of the centrifuges. It's not hard for the Iranians to refine this to weapons-grade, and then it's not hard ultimately to cobble together a nuclear device. So, look, I am sad to see, but not surprised, that J D Vance and senior members of this administration are using words like "obliterate," which, again, I have seen nothing

• 5:17Speaker 05

  to suggest that that verb, you know, is in any way applicable here. And again, that raises very serious questions, because what do the Israelis do if it turns out that we simply move to the right a little bit, a month or weeks, the ability of the Iranians to break out a weapon if they choose to do that? And by the way, what about the fact that now, if you're an Iranian regime member, as awful as you are, you're also smart enough to know, "Gosh, the whole negotiations thing was never real. The president tore up the one thing that slowed the Iranians, the JCPOA, and he allowed the Israelis to start bombing in the middle of a negotiation." So if you're an Iranian regime member, you say, "Okay, we tried that route. Now you know what we're gonna do? We're gonna do what North Korea

• 5:59Speaker 05

  did. We're gonna do what Pakistan did, is we're gonna go underground, and the world is gonna learn about our progress when we actually test a device. And at that point, guess what? There are gonna be no more military attacks on Iran." That, to me, is the really kind of horrifying scenario here.

• 6:14Scott Galloway?

  So Representative, so if the president had come to Congress and sought congressional approval and laid out exactly and very detailed plans what he was planning to do, the ordinance, the armaments, the risks, the upside, the downside, would you have voted yes or no and why?

• 6:32Speaker 05

  It's sort of hard to answer that hypothetical question because there would be all sorts of other questions you would need to answer, like what we've been sort of alluding to. Okay, we can make very big explosions in ventilation shafts in Fordo and Natanz, but what else? What else? What do we do if the 60% uranium is in a warehouse somewhere, as it may very well be? But let me, let me not try to entirely dance around that question, and I'll tell you what my bias is. All I've got is history to go on, right? And the history of our military interventions in the region in my lifetime is pretty darn bad, right? We took out Muammar Gaddafi. Libya is now a chaotic dystopia.

• 7:17Speaker 05

  We know the story of Iraq, where we empowered Iran and lost 4,400 troops in our efforts there. And of course, we don't need to talk about Afghanistan to know that that's not something. So, anyway, my point obviously is what do I have to go on other than the history and the question of whether we have been successful in achieving our strategic aims in the region? And the answer to that question is pretty much generally no. So, let me just say, facts matter, but I would have had a very, very strong bias based on our history of ending up with outcomes that none of us would have either predicted or wanted when we get involved militarily in the Middle East.

• 7:50Jessica Tarlov?

  I understand, you know, we can't get in a time machine and we can't go back and do this differently. So, we are where we are today, and I saw a former Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, was out in the New York Times with an op-ed saying that he thought the strike was a mistake, and he hopes it's a success. Can you talk us through what you think a success looks like at this point? Do you think there is any chance at an Iranian and Israeli lasting ceasefire? And Donald Trump did float the idea of regime change just over Truth Social a couple of days ago. Do you think that that is still any part of the conversation?

• 8:27Speaker 05

  Well, yeah, I mean, your question is not too hard to answer. And just because I'm concerned, as you might imagine, I can envision and even accept the possibility that, yeah, you know, the Iranian people might finally do what the Argentine people did in 1982, when it turned out that the dictatorial generals that were governing them couldn't even defend the Falkland Islands. And the Argentine people said, guess what? If you, if you bunch of generals can't even keep us safe from a country that's 12,000 miles away, out you go. So wouldn't that be amazing if the Iranian people had the capacity and the will to finally overthrow this truly evil regime? Again, I'm not sure the United States should be in the business of, of promoting that kind of regime change, because we don't have a very good track record. But oh, my God, what an amazing outcome that would be. And look, it's possible.

• 9:12Speaker 05

  It's possible. It would also be amazing if the administration and the Israelis would say, okay, Iran, you're probably in your weakest point in a generation. Let's now sit down at the negotiating table. That's a little bit of a hard sell, right? Because if you're an Iranian regime member, you say, oh, really? Now we're going to sit down at the negotiating table. And if you don't like what we do, you know, we get another B2 flight over our nation. So that's a hard sell, but I wouldn't completely rule it out. The problem is, if we had two hours to do it, we could talk about gasoline prices at $6, about dead American soldiers and sailors, about missiles, about terrorist cells activated in London and Rome. We could talk about the possibility of destabilization in the region and the fact that the Jordanian king, who's really, really important to us, sits atop a powder keg.

• 9:54Speaker 05

  And that, you know, real volatility could result in regime changes in other places like Jordan, where it would be a catastrophe for us. So anyway, let's acknowledge that there could be a good outcome here. It's just, you know, you'd have to go and get the odds from a bookie, you know? How much do you bet on the best case scenario coming out of the Middle East?

• 10:14Scott Galloway?

  Representative, I worry that as someone who's a Democrat and is committed to retaking the House and the White House, I worry that as always, we figure out a way to come across as incredibly weak. And that is, we're angry that they didn't come to us, as you should have, for constitutional, bypass the Constitution. That now seems to be the norm, almost a given. And not enough conversation around whether or not this was the right move. And I want to applaud you for actually addressing the question, but let's steelman this a little bit, because you brought us some issues. The price of oil, it looks as if right now the oil markets have yawned. And don't believe that this threatens oil prices at the Strait of Hormuz, if in fact it is compromised, it'll hurt India and China more than it would hurt us. We're fairly

• 10:58Scott Galloway?

  energy self-sufficient. That Khomeini at 85 years of age, leading a theocracy that has had its hands cut off, is on the brink of collapse, and this might tip it over into collapse, and that we are not planning, as far as I can tell, to put boots on the ground. We're just always remiss to take a victory lap. We're kicking Russia's ass. It feels like Iran's air defenses are down because of the brave work of the IDF. And we have demonstrated that we spend $800 billion for a reason, and that we have armaments that no one else has, and that the the capacity to get closer to a bomb, we know they didn't get any closer. We know that they're further away. We just don't know how much they're further away. Isn't this potentially, or most likely even, something that will be

• 11:43Scott Galloway?

  looked back as America exerting its power in a thoughtful way, and that the Democrats were more focused on procedure than actual outcomes?

• 11:54Speaker 05

  Yeah, well, you know, okay, fair point, Scott. And, you know, I really like when we're talking about military activity and war and our troops to not collapse into a consideration of the politics of this. But you ask an interesting question, to which I would say, these things can break either way.

• 12:13Scott Galloway?

  Yeah.

• 12:14Speaker 05

  You know, if we were having this conversation in the early first decade of the 2000s, and talking to Hillary Clinton, and Hillary Clinton says, you know, we Democrats makes the argument that you just made, we Democrats always end up looking weak. So I'm voting yes to give George W. Bush the authority to go into Iraq.

• 12:34Scott Galloway?

  Great analogy.

• 12:34Speaker 05

  At that moment in time, I'm not sure Hillary Clinton thought to herself that it is that vote, this hawkish vote, because I'm afraid of looking weak, that is probably going to be the single largest factor that an unknown state senator from Illinois named Barack Obama is going to take me out as the presidential candidate of 2008, right? So I think these things can can turn on a dime. And look, let's not be silly about this. If the best case scenario happens, and the regime falls, and the new regime or the new government says, we're never going to mess around with uranium or nuclear weapons again, yeah, you know, we will have gotten very lucky. And I'll be sad, because you say process.

• 13:11Speaker 05

  You know, to me, abiding by the Constitution is not just a reversion to process. It's actually something that every two years I raise my hand and swear to do. So I'm sort of a little sad that I would say, well, we're having a process argument because I think the Constitution is worth defending. But anyway, my larger point is that in these sorts of situations, you're right. You know, there is a political implication. But again, um, if you were thinking purely politically, would you have said, yeah, let's take that Gaddafi guy out. Yeah, let's, let's, you know, try to nation build in Afghanistan because we've got the best capabilities everywhere. In retrospect, you would say, boy, pretty ugly political position.

• 13:50Jessica Tarlov?

  I want to stay on the politics issue, but frame it in a little bit of a different way because it's been reported that Democrats were not briefed about the strike ahead of time, including yourself and Senator Mark Warner, both the ranking members on the intel committee as members of the Gang of Eight. That is something deeply concerning to me that the Republicans feel like they're just going to go it alone. Can you talk about whether that's true, the implications of that? And if there's any chance that we can make foreign policy, which has historically been a space that could be fairly bipartisan, uh, return to the norm or at least get a bit better than it is right now?

• 14:29Speaker 05

  Yeah, look, I'll, I'll absolutely acknowledge that there are, you know, issues with congressional consultation, right? I mean, Scott didn't ask this specifically, but implied it, which is, hey, what if we have a four week debate over this attack? At that point, haven't the Iranians completely hidden all their uranium? That's a, that's a fair point, right? And we could have that argument and maybe you would think about things like informing small numbers of members of Congress, Gang of Eight, leadership, whatever you want to do. So there's a, there's a reasonable argument to have there, but it does stop at the law, right? You know, just because something is hard or inconvenient, uh, doesn't mean that you could violate the law or the Constitution. I keep saying that it's not just process, it's the law. Um, but yeah, I mean, one thing is unambiguous, Jess, which is that letting republic, letting

• 15:14Speaker 05

  members of your own party know, but not letting the opposition know is a sort of... Ugly innovation of the Trump administration. And, and, and look, it, it's sort of dumb too, right? Because now, if this thing goes horribly wrong, which, which you could, politically speaking, yeah, you, Mr. President, own this. And by the way, the four or five Republicans you chose to reach out to own it as well. And, you know, we've got the political defense of you didn't even, I read about this on Twitter, you know? So, anyway, that's a pretty ugly new innovation in this, uh, from this administration.

• 15:47Scott Galloway?

  Representative Himes is the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee. You're just privy to color and detail that the general public and the media isn't. And that, one of the things that struck me about this attack, or specifically the aftermath of the attack, is whether it was Iraq or Afghanistan, or expelling Hussein from Kuwait, regardless of the success or lack thereof of those interventions. The next day, we had big nations with substantial armies weighing in, in support. There was clearly a lot of groundwork laid to say that, all right, we support this. It was clear that we're not acting alone, that we might be the leadership and have the biggest military in the West, but we are, in fact, hand in hand with the West.

• 16:29Scott Galloway?

  And one of the things that was so striking here and so disappointing was that the only nations that commented on this the next day were the Chinese saying, there they go again, making the world more unstable, and Russia mocking us for not diminishing their nuclear capabilities to the extent we were bragging. The lack of alliances, the lack of support, this go-alone arrogance, to me, was so distressing and something that the public didn't discuss. As somebody who is obviously in conversation with our allies, both in, you know, open formats and behind closed doors, can you speak a little bit to, one, do you buy the thesis that we don't have the support we typically have? And two, what you're seeing across our alliances around this type of activity?

• 17:15Speaker 05

  Yeah, I mean, not surprised, right? We know that the Trump administration, you know, doesn't put much, to put it mildly, value on our allies or about acting together. But these interventions that we've talked about, some of which didn't go very well, almost always involved us working with our allies, just because practically that's a good thing, and also because we care that we speak as the West and not just as the US. So George H. W. Bush, when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, famously spent weeks working the phone to put together the coalition that ultimately was successful in removing Saddam Hussein from Kuwait. Yeah.

• 17:58Speaker 05

  And, you know, the famous coalition of the willing going into Iraq with us. Again, I think we can look back on that and say, gosh, that didn't work out quite the way we had hoped. Uh huh. But, you know, George W. Bush did do the work to get our NATO allies and others. Even in Libya, we were operating under the auspices of NATO. So that's generally a good idea. It gives credibility and it gives us, to be fair, on the margin, some operational capacity that we might not otherwise have on the margin. So, you know, when you take action like this, it's always a good idea, for no other reason than to hear what the Brits and the, you know, others have to say about how we can do this well. But this is not, of course, the way this administration thinks about taking action abroad.

• 18:40Jessica Tarlov?

  And it's interesting timing. The president is on his way to the NATO summit in The Hague. He definitely wanted a big win coming in, since everybody is pretty mad at him about tariffs and the general state of the world. How do you think this is going to play out over the next couple of days?

• 18:57Speaker 05

  You know, I can't emphasize enough how much the facts on the ground matter to the answer to that question. Again, on one extreme, maybe the Iranian people finally say, we've had enough, and they, you know, have both the willingness and the capability to overthrow this hideous regime, in which case, we're all going to feel good. On the other extreme, of course, is, you know, continued Israeli attacks on Iran. Iran claiming that they're violating the ceasefire and Israel would do that because they realize that we probably haven't significantly damaged the nuclear capability. And now we're back to a shooting war in the Middle East. Or again, my, my worst case scenario is the quiet scenario.

• 19:40Speaker 05

  It's not bombs going off or missiles landing in Bahrain. It's the Iranians go dead quiet for six months and seven months from now, there's a test of a nuclear device. So, you know, where we land on that spectrum of, you know, magnificent to horrible is going to have a lot to do with how, you know, to Scott's point, the domestic politics play here and the way the rest of the world thinks about it. Now, let me make one last point here because I think those of us who are interested in international affairs should be self-reflective. This is a point of humility. If you had told me two years ago that Israel was going to be able to largely take out Hezbollah,

• 20:20Speaker 05

  to assassinate Hamas leadership in downtown Tehran and basically crush their leadership and disable the Iranian air defenses, whatever, 40, 50%, I would have said that's over ambitious. And so, let's not be overly biased towards the pessimistic here. What the Israelis, whatever you think about, you know, its wisdom or its justice, what the Israelis have accomplished, you know, since October 7th, and I set aside their activities in Gaza when I say this, militarily against Hezbollah and militarily against Hamas in Iran, has been, let's just say, nobody, I think, would have put a big bet on that outcome.

• 21:01Scott Galloway?

  Just along those lines, Representative, if you think of us as having four enemies, firstly, China, North Korea, Iran and Russia, I would argue China's not an enemy. It's the Americans. When we have a competitor that gets too successful, we think of them as an enemy. I think of them as a competitor. So, that leaves Russia, North Korea and Iran. I mean, we are, quite frankly, kind of kicking ass and taking names. I mean, I think Russia and Iran are just not in the same place they were 24 months ago. And I'll just a pointed question. Hasn't the Ukrainian army and the IDF, quite frankly, been doing the West's dirty work? And kind of kicking ass and asking questions later? Don't we owe, as someone who's on the Intelligence Committee,

• 21:43Scott Galloway?

  with exponentially more budget, exponentially better equipment, haven't they demonstrated the kind of confidence and courage that has advanced our objectives? And made us safer? Don't we owe Ukrainian army and the IDF a huge debt of gratitude?

• 22:01Speaker 05

  I would separate those two questions. You know, everyone thought Ukraine was going down.

• 22:07Scott Galloway?

  Yeah.

• 22:08Speaker 05

  And what Ukraine has managed to pull off has been nothing short of epic, especially in the context of our wavering support, where we get sort of partial credit for helping the Ukrainians. And the lesson that has come out of that war is hopefully being learned by dictators everywhere, which is that when you're on someone else's land, even if you have overwhelming firepower, you're going to have a hard time. A million casualties in Russia right now. Now Putin doesn't care about that, but you know, hopefully the other dictators around the world who are thinking about a Ukraine-like incursion are taking that a little bit more seriously. And again, I just, I won't repeat myself, but what the IDF achieved against Hezbollah,

• 22:49Speaker 05

  what the IDF achieved against Hamas in Tehran and what they achieved against the Iranians is pretty spectacular. I'm putting an asterisk on that because too much of what we see happening in Gaza right now should not be happening. There is too much humanitarian suffering and civilian loss. And I do think that over time, the IDF will need to grapple with that. But the last answer on your question about the IDF, Scott, is again, it really matters how this ends. And Middle East experts will tell you, you sometimes don't know the answer to the famous question, tell me how this ends in the Middle East for a couple of years. So again, I'm not going to beat this dead horse too much, but a regime change and

• 23:32Speaker 05

  a giving up of the nuclear weapons, wow, incredible. But there are a lot of other scenarios. And until we know which door gets opened, I think it's a little early to celebrate or to say that the IDF has been doing our dirty work. Look, again, let me just say it again. If the Iranians give up their nuclear weapons, or, you know, let us all hope for regime change, remarkable. But we just, we're not there yet.

• 23:57Jessica Tarlov?

  Congressman Himes, thank you so much for your time. It's invaluable that you could join us.

• 24:01Speaker 05

  Thanks a lot. Thanks for having me.

• 24:02Scott Galloway?

  Congressman, thoughtful and direct, you're in the right seat. It makes us feel good that you've decided to do what you do.

• 24:09Jessica Tarlov?

  And Scott rarely says that to anyone that we talk to, so.

• 24:13Speaker 05

  I'm just chuckling because I'm not sure that thoughtful and direct is actually in the job description of a member of Congress, but okay, I'll take it.

• 24:19Jessica Tarlov?

  It should be.

• 24:21Scott Galloway?

  Keep on keeping on. Right on. Thanks, Representative.

• 24:23Jessica Tarlov?

  Thank you for your time.

• 24:24Speaker 05

  All right. Take care. Thank you very much.

• 24:26Scott Galloway?

  Okay, let's take a quick break. Stay with us.

• 24:34Scott Galloway?

  Support for the show comes from Superhuman. The pace of modern work can be relentless. You're getting a constant influx of messages from a ton of different apps. You haven't closed all your browser tabs in a year. Everything seems urgent and staying on top of it all feels like an impossible task. Superhuman Go is an AI chat that's always there when you need it, already aware of what you're doing and doesn't ask you to start from zero. Superhuman Go, from the makers of Grammarly, help you be the best version of yourself at work. It handles the repetitive stuff so you can focus on the work that only you can do. Whether you need to summarize an endless email thread or prep for a meeting that's happening in five minutes, Superhuman Go works inside the tools and sites you already use, your browser, inbox, docs, and your project tools. And its AI chat is available on the side of your browser and it's always ready. No

• 25:19Scott Galloway?

  new tabs, no switching apps, no losing your place. This is AI that works with you, not on top of you, so that you have the time and brain space to solve the problems that matter. Check it out. Find out more at superhuman.com.

• 25:37Scott Galloway?

  Support for the show comes from Vanta. As AI adoption grows, so does your company's security risks and requirements. New frameworks, audits, and vendors keep piling on, but your team isn't getting any bigger. Most compliance tools promise automation, but you're really stuck doing all the work by hand, chasing screenshots, validating controls, and playing catch-up when audit season comes around again. Vanta works differently. The Regentic Trust platform is built to scale with you, not slow you down. With over 1,400 automated tests across 400-plus integrations, Vanta collects evidence and monitors your controls year-round, cutting your audit prep by 82%. Plus, you can access the Vanta agent everywhere you work, whether your team is in Vanta every day or living in tools including Claude or Cursor. Want proof?

• 26:22Scott Galloway?

  Over 16,000 fast-growing companies like Ramp, Ryder, and Harvey save time and resources while scaling fast with Vanta. Learn more at vanta.com/profg and get $1,000 off. That's spelled V-A-N-T-A dot com slash prof G for $1,000 off. Support for the show comes from Vanta. As AI adoption grows, so does your company's security risks and requirements. New frameworks, audits, and vendors keep piling on, but your team isn't getting any bigger. Most compliance tools promise automation, but you're really stuck doing all the work by hand, chasing screenshots, validating controls, and playing catch-up when audit season comes around again. Vanta works differently.

• 27:06Scott Galloway?

  The Regentic Trust platform is built to scale with you, not slow you down. With over 1,400 automated tests across 400-plus integrations, Vanta collects evidence and monitors your controls year-round, cutting your audit prep by 82%. Plus, you can access the Vanta agent everywhere you work, whether your team is in Vanta every day or living in tools including Claude or Cursor. Want proof? Over 16,000 fast-growing companies like Ramp, Ryder, and Harvey save time and resources while scaling fast with Vanta. Learn more at vanta.com/profg and get $1,000 off. That's spelled V-A-N-T-A dot com slash prof G for $1,000 off.

• 27:51Scott Galloway?

  Welcome back. Jess, what did you think of Representative Hines?

• 27:55Jessica Tarlov?

  I loved him.

• 27:55Scott Galloway?

  You loved him?

• 27:56Jessica Tarlov?

  I'm a big fan of his and I appreciate also that he comes on Fox, which not every Democrat does, but having the chance to hear from the ranking member on the Intel Committee is really special. And I thought he did a lot of things that are different from how many members did, but he was open to criticizing himself and the party. He talked about moments of humility and he was also able to, I think, thoughtfully reflect on a best-case scenario coming out of this and then also to prepare us for what he's afraid of. I thought it was a very well-rounded approach to a very fast-moving situation that carries a lot of danger to it, frankly. What'd you think?

• 28:40Scott Galloway?

  The more I'm exposed in the last 10, 10 years, I had never, I don't think, other than occasionally, you know, when I took my sister to Washington, when she was in college and I would just walk into congressional offices and meet with some aide, I had no exposure to elected representatives. And in the last 10 years, I've had a lot, mostly because I want my money, to be honest.

• 29:01Jessica Tarlov?

  Money's nice.

• 29:02Scott Galloway?

  Yeah, money's access. And so I've, I've accessed a lot of elected representatives. And I am consistently impressed by what thoughtful, intelligent, patriotic, committed people they are. And it bothers me how lazy people are to constantly shitpost our government, believing that everyone's corrupt and nobody's smart. There's a lot of really, really impressive people who give up. You know, a guy like that could be easily be running a private equity firm, clocking a shit-ton of money and at Bezos' wedding this weekend. And instead, he chooses to, you know, be in DC trying to sort through this shit. So I'm... You know, I'm always impressed or consistently impressed to the upside by these individuals.

• 29:45Scott Galloway?

  So back to the issue at hand, Trump announced what he called a complete and total ceasefire between Israel and Iran. The truce was supposed to be phased in over 24 hours, but already it's showing signs of strain. Israel reportedly struck a radar site near Tehran after claiming Iran violated the ceasefire first. And behind the scenes, Trump is said to be furious with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu pressing him on a tense call on Tuesday morning. So we went from bunker busters to a ceasefire in less than 48 hours, and now the ceasefire is already cracking. Any sense for what changed behind the scenes to make this deal happen in the first place? And it's already falling apart.

• 30:25Jessica Tarlov?

  I'm not sure how much of the deal was really together or how much it's fallen apart, actually. A ceasefire is, in a lot of ways, I know it sounds like a final thing, but it's a moving target constantly, and it ebbs and flows, and I'm still hopeful that we will be able to get to one. I don't know what that looks like in the long term, because some people just can't be friends, and I think Israel and Iran are two of those kinds of some people. But I remain optimistic. I think part of what got our hopes up is that we have a truth, social, happy president that feels that he can post through a foreign policy crisis. And that has some benefits.

• 31:09Jessica Tarlov?

  I think the transparency, to some degree, is good. It has some negative effects, like the fact that we had to send, you know, a decoy fleet and the real fleet to try to throw Iran off the scent because Donald Trump was posting through the entire thing. And that's something that you don't want to see from the commander in chief. But I went to bed very hopeful it was ceasefire news. I woke up this morning, the ceasefire is off, and maybe it's back on. This was as President Trump was boarding to head to The Hague for the NATO summit. And I hope something good can come out of this. But I was struck by, and it was interesting, that Congressman Himes has introduced this resolution.

• 31:52Jessica Tarlov?

  He wants us to follow the Constitution, and he did have a defense for why this was different than actions past presidents have taken, and also said... Past presidents shouldn't have done these kinds of things without authorization. So at least it was a bit of a nuanced take. But I was struck by what German Chancellor Merz said about it. And he said, there is no reason to criticize what America did at the weekend. Yes, it is not without risk, but leaving things as they were was not an option either. I think that that speaks most accurately to how I'm feeling in my heart about what happened. I understand the American intel community did not have the same assessment as the Israelis.

• 32:35Jessica Tarlov?

  The Israelis are obviously closer to it, but I'm fundamentally concerned that it seems like Bibi Netanyahu is now our DNI. That's a dangerous place to be in, but so is having Tulsi Gabbard as your DNI. Also dangerous. But we know that past presidents have tried and failed to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions. I know that they should have stayed in the JCPOA, that we were slowing their enrichment development by a lot. I also know we had to give them money that was used to fund terrorism, and that's not a good outcome either. But Merz's comments really struck me, and I do feel it was unsustainable to let things just keep going on, as it were. And at this particular moment, and I like that you brought it up to Congressman Himes,

• 33:19Jessica Tarlov?

  because of the work of the Israelis and the Ukrainians, the allies of the Iranians, like the Russians, are unable to help them. They have been so utterly decimated between going after Hamas and Hezbollah and the Russians, that we have an opportunity with a weak axis of evil to do something really important for the safety of the region and the world. And that was the opportunity that I saw.

• 33:45Scott Galloway?

  Yeah, I thought it was really well put. I mean, again, self-hating Americans, we can never actually take credit or give credit where it's due, and that is. If Russia, specifically the perception of Russia's fierce fighting force was intact, I don't think we could have done this. No. Or I don't think we would have had the balls to do it because we would have been worried they'd be arming their proxies in Syria with surface air missiles that could take out B2 bombers. One of those B2s going down and then a bunch of Iranian kids jumping on the wings of B2s would be a really bad image for us. And we would have been scared that Russia's long arms would be, you know, within reach

• 34:27Scott Galloway?

  or it's, this would have been within the grasp of Russia arming Syrians or potentially arming or helping or supporting Iran. And the way I see this is the following, I'm very much in favor of this. I've never understood how far-right Republicans can be isolationist and then vote for a $200 billion increase in the military budget from 800 billion to a trillion such that we don't have a bigger budget than the next 10 biggest nations, but the entire world. It's like, well, what's the point? Canada's not going to invade Buffalo anytime soon. When you spend $800 billion on our military, you are making a decision to get off of your

• 35:08Scott Galloway?

  heels and onto our toes and project power and deliver violence to other places in a very imperialist, aggressive way to represent our interests offensively and proactively. And that's what this is. And I don't, I think we're looking at the wrong metric. I understand that we want to diminish their nuclear capability, but for me, the outcome here is the following. I think the IRGC or the Islamic Republic has been a cancer, an occupying force, has very little support amongst the Iranian people. I think two of the biggest unlocks, and you know, as a dork, I think one, overthrowing or nudging the Venezuelan government over the edge such that we're even more energy independent, Venezuela has more oil than Saudi Arabia, and two, seeing the Islamic

• 35:53Scott Galloway?

  Republic come to an end. I think that would be one of the most accretive actions for the 45 million women in Iran that, in terms of actual, if we really did give a flying fuck about human rights and stability in the region. And I've always thought Iran and America could be incredible allies that, you know, I've said this before, the Iranians I know are more American than Americans. So I see this more as while they're kind of, quite frankly, down and out to hopefully tip over the Iranian people to give them the confidence to perhaps not overthrow this regime, but create their own regime change. You can't, you can't, you can't create regime change from the outside. You can potentially inspire it. And that's what I'm hoping, that's

• 36:38Scott Galloway?

  what I'm hoping this was. The other thing that comes out here for me, or the observation is there's a reason that business people make such shitty presidents. It's easy to believe that you call the two CEOs of companies and you can do this and say, okay, hey, Steve Jobs, it's Bill Gates, we're not going to hire each other's employees. Stop it. I forget they, one of them called the other and said, stop hiring my employees.

• 37:00Jessica Tarlov?

  Yeah, I remember the story, but I don't.

• 37:02Scott Galloway?

  It was Steve Jobs and maybe it was the guy from Google. Anyways, you're not supposed to do that, but they can call each other and handshake and then send out an email to all the key people and boom, it's in place. Ceasefires don't work that way. You've got to give it time. You've got to phase it in. You've got to relay information to your, your service to air missile battery commanders. You've got to have checks and balances, means of observation, ensure that all the entire command chain is on board with it and you need to phase it in over weeks, if not months sometimes. But to believe that, oh, it's like a business deal. And if I get the two top guys to agree to it on the phone with me, it's going to happen. It's just so incredibly naive that this thing was going to hold. I

• 37:46Scott Galloway?

  don't think there's ever been a truce where someone has called and said, oh, agree to it. Okay. I got your agreement, agreement. And then you go out and announce it. That, that, that, it, folks, geopolitical truces don't work that way. There's too many moving parts. There's too many, the IRGC right now isn't even able to communicate with its different portions of its armed services right now because they're afraid to use the internet for fear that the IDF uses it as a signal code to drum strike them. So for, again, for Donald Trump to think he can come in and say, oh, you own the Plaza, I own the Hilton, we're going to stop trying to poach each other's employees and get the CEOs to agree. That's not how this works.

• 38:29Scott Galloway?

  In the Middle East. And then the final observation is our Director of National Intelligence. I mean, I see three legs of the stool here. Kinetic power, which we demonstrated in spades, which I'm a fan of. Two alliances, we fell down. It's embarrassing. And one thing I don't think the media is observing is that Britain, France, even the Kingdom didn't come out with direct statements of support. Both Bushes would have made sure that would have happened. Obama would have made sure that would happen. Biden would have made sure that happened, such that it was, this was a move from the West and from democracy, not just from Trump. And then the third thing is competence. And who the fuck are we supposed to believe here? We have a Director of National Intelligence stating that they aren't any closer to Obama,

• 39:12Scott Galloway?

  and then Trump directly contradicting his Director of National Intelligence. We have Secretaries Hegseth and Rubio stating that we are not pursuing regime change. And then we have Trump saying in all caps, "Make Iran great again," and saying he's in favor of regime change. No one knows, no one knows what is going on here. Who on earth is actually going to report on what has happened? Who has the credibility? What institution, what experts are going to be able to put out any credible evidence, one way or the other, of the level of damage or lack thereof of these facilities? Because we now have the fucking bad news bears running the government. You don't even know who to believe. They can't

• 39:57Scott Galloway?

  stay on message. They're not consistent. The military, thank God, still demonstrates more competence than any organization in history. But we have a president who does not understand this is not a business deal. The truces between warring nations take weeks, if not months, to implement, and there has to be a series of checks, and they have to be wound down incrementally. They can't happen overnight. And when you announce them, like you want to take a victory lap because it's some big deal or something, you are setting yourself and the nation up for embarrassment and failure. And the level of incompetence here is starting to seep into everything this guy does. Your thoughts?

• 40:35Jessica Tarlov?

  Well, it also speaks to why he tore up the nuclear deal in 2018 without a solution of what we were going to do instead. And the numbers are staggering in terms of the increase in enriched uranium going from under 4% to 60% and adding an extra 100 kilograms at least to the stockpile. And we don't know what will happen with their nuclear stockpile and how they'll rebuild. And the timeline that Congressman Himes was giving was startling to me, where he said six or seven months. And so if the intel community's assessment was that they hadn't made a final decision as to whether they were trying to build a

• 41:15Jessica Tarlov?

  nuclear bomb. And I know that Jon Stewart is a very funny guy, but he's also a very serious guy. And everyone should check out the montage that he had on the show last week of Netanyahu saying, the bomb is coming, the bomb is coming. And it's over the course of the last 20 years, saying that we're at that 90% level. Remember that graphic that he showed on the floor of the UN? And our intel community says that that isn't the case. That doesn't mean that Iran isn't a danger. That doesn't mean that Iran isn't the largest state sponsor of terrorism. That doesn't mean that Iran isn't responsible for killing innocents all over the Middle East and also Americans. When the IRGC threatened to activate sleeper cells in the United States,

• 41:59Jessica Tarlov?

  I completely freaked out because I'm sure that they have them here. And we could be in scenario. I'm in Washington DC right now as we're speaking, and I'm walking around thinking, what could happen to any of us? I live in New York City. Great place to do a terrorist attack. They've done it before. So all of that is deeply concerning to me. To the point about the yahoos that are in charge, it does feel like Donald Trump isn't really listening to anybody else than Bibi Netanyahu. And I sound like a bit of a broken record about it, but he has essentially supplanted everybody else. His intelligence is the intelligence that the United States trusts. Donald Trump, I think, doesn't understand how good Bibi

• 42:40Jessica Tarlov?

  is at doing his job. This is how he's managed to stay in power for this long. This is a man that is staying in power so that he can stay out of jail. And he has Trump wrapped around his finger. He can get him to trust the Israelis over the United States with the drop of a hat. And that's what we're seeing here. You noticed DNI Tulsi Gabbard out of the frame when Trump came out to make his address after the strike was carried out, said, you know, total and complete success. Tulsi was not standing behind him. It was just Hegseth Rubio and J.D. Vance. So clearly, that's the imagery that he wants to project forward, that Tulsi has nothing to do with this. But the New York Times, who has done some incredible

• 43:21Jessica Tarlov?

  reporting on what's been going on behind the scenes, shows a very insular group that's informing him and the fact that we are hand in glove with the Israelis every step of the way. They're strongest ally in the region. Both of you and I are strong supporters. And I was very appreciative that Congressman Himes also stipulated that the situation in Gaza is very different than what we are talking about here. But you essentially have a president that is all but going it alone. And he has a bit of a toddler sensibility about how things should happen. Like, I want it, and I want it now. And that makes sense looking back at the way that he's conducted his business deals over, you know, the course

• 44:06Jessica Tarlov?

  of the last 50, 60 years. But it's very different when you're playing in the big leagues like this. And he seems to be completely myopically focused on how do I get that Nobel Peace Prize? How do I get that Nobel Peace Prize? And ending the Iranian nuclear program is certainly a good way to head in that direction. I wanted to bring this up because you talked about politics a bit during the interview. And I saw so many Democrats just reflexively opposing this, not even willing to consider that there might be merit to it, or even going so far as to praise what the Air Force was able to pull off, which was absolutely incredible. And I feel like there's this strong argument that Democrats can be making, or frankly,

• 44:51Jessica Tarlov?

  people who are just observing what's going on, about how Joe Biden governed and the foreign policy moves that he made that set Trump up for success in this moment. And I really wish that we could have a broader contextualized conversation about foreign policy. We didn't just, like, wake up On January 21 of 2025, and that was the beginning of all of this. And there's so much that went on over the course of the last four years, from weakening Russia, what Israel did using our weapons, the Ukrainians did using our weapons, President Biden allowing this to happen, that has provided for hopefully what is a good result. And I'm very focused on that. And I think that there is to some degree a victory lap

• 45:35Jessica Tarlov?

  that the Democrats should be able to take on this.

• 45:38Scott Galloway?

  Okay, let's take a quick break. Stay with us.

• 45:45Speaker 00

  This episode is brought to you by Google Chrome. You think you know a browser, but Gemini and Chrome, that's new. It can help you with practically anything on the web, like restoring a vintage motorcycle from a 50-page restoration block, or finally break down that long article you've had open for weeks. Gemini and Chrome is here for it. Ready to make anything online make sense? There's no place like Chrome. Check responses set up required. Compatibility and availability varies 18 plus.

• 46:12Speaker 01

  Real value shows up in reliability. You don't have to second guess. Like a set of Firestone All Season tires. They're designed to deliver confidence inspiring wet weather traction and a quieter ride, no matter the road, season after season. Firestone All Season tires. For durability, you can count on, just like people count on you. Firestone, always dependable, since 1900.

• 46:41Scott Galloway?

  Support for the show comes from Nutriful, the number one dermatologist recommended hair growth supplement brand used by over one and a half million people. When you get to the stage of life where you start to notice hair loss, you have a few options. You can shave it all off and enjoy your new look, or you can commit to a new team whose logo you wouldn't mind constantly spotting on a hat, or you can actually restore some of your hair's former glory with Nutriful. Nutriful has formulas built for men at different life stages, such as Nutriful Men for guys aged 18 to 49, or the new Nutriful Men 50 and older. It's the first product of its kind specifically made for men over 50. You can address the key root causes of thinning wherever you are in life. Grow visibly thicker, fuller hair in three to six months. Start Nutriful today and make the hat optional.

• 47:26Scott Galloway?

  Visit nutriful.com and enter promo code PROVGE for $10 off your first month subscription and free shipping. Find out why Nutriful is the best selling hair growth supplement brand at nutriful.com, spelled N-U-T-R-A-F-O-L dot com, promo code PROV-G. That's nutriful.com promo code PROV-G.

• 47:50Scott Galloway?

  Welcome back. It's gonna be, I mean, first off, and maybe we can play the clip.

• 47:56Speaker 06

  You know what? We have, we basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the fuck they're doing. Do you understand that?

• 48:07Scott Galloway?

  For the president to come out and say, these guys have been at war so long that they don't know what the fuck they're doing. As someone who's fond of expletives, the president should not be making them. President of the United States, that just diminishes his authority and respect. And also, what I believe happened here, and let me, I think this was a good idea, but that doesn't mean the strategy and the incentives here don't reflect poorly on the current leadership. I believe the only reason Trump did this was because he looked at Netanyahu's dick and thought, wait, I want some big dick energy of my own. I think this was seen globally as such an extraordinarily competent, aggressive, and courageous move, what the IDF was able to pull off in Iran, that he wanted to jump

• 48:52Scott Galloway?

  on the medal podium and say, look at me, which is the wrong reason to do this, even if it was the right tactical maneuver. And what seems clear to me is Bibi Netanyahu thinks he's on top. He can do whatever he wants, and that the president will go along with it.

• 49:11Jessica Tarlov?

  He's right.

• 49:12Scott Galloway?

  So essentially, you know, Middle East policy right now is being run by the superpower there, and the superpower there is Israel. And then, the really dangerous thing about all of this is that Israeli leadership wants to be on a war footing, whether it's the right thing or not, he's on a war footing trying to stay out of jail. And that is his only chance of staying out of jail is to get people to rally around the flag because they are at war. And I believe that that is why we continue to pulverize Gaza beyond what is needed and what is humane. And that he is very excited to go into Iran because he realizes the only thing standing between him and jail is the rallying around the flag

• 49:56Scott Galloway?

  that happens when you're at war. And that is a frightening place to be when you have a place as unstable as the Middle East and you have a nation with nukes. So this is a very, as is everything in the Middle East, this is a very complex, upsetting situation. And where we will see, I think, unintended consequences. And right so far, we haven't. It looks as if Khomeini's response has been performative.

• 50:25Jessica Tarlov?

  Yeah.

• 50:26Scott Galloway?

  You know, the missile barrages into American bases in Qatar, and I believe in Iraq, have so far been totally ineffective. I think he even gave the heads up to-

• 50:36Jessica Tarlov?

  He did. And then you had Qatar helping with brokering the ceasefire of last night. So-

• 50:43Scott Galloway?

  Right.

• 50:43Jessica Tarlov?

  Qatar working with us, essentially, to make sure that things can simmer down.

• 50:48Scott Galloway?

  Right. So it looks as if that it was basically performative, such that Khomeini can say to his people, I'm tough, I respond, but not risk escalation. And if it stops there, then great, then everyone can take, Israel and Americans can take a victory lap. But I think the president's inability to appreciate that strength and greatness is in the agency of others, not having our traditional allies around us, supporting us with intelligence and with, you know, perceptual support, if you will, ensuring that we, that the world knows this was an action of the West, just not from a guy who demonstrates incompetence. An intelligence apparatus that seems totally sclerotic and bipolar, don't know who to listen to, don't know what they're meaning. And then

• 51:33Scott Galloway?

  the thing that, you know, as supporters of Israel, I think is really concerning right now, is when he comes out and says, they don't know what the fuck they're doing, and I'm angry at Israel. That's language and a statement he says to Bibi privately on a secure phone. He doesn't say it on the West Lawn because all that does is embolden Israel's enemies. Khomeini has a lot of different options being presented to him. And when Trump says that Israel doesn't know what the fuck it's doing and leaks discreetly or overtly a real dissatisfaction and frustration with Israel, he is emboldening Israel's enemies to take more aggressive and bold action than they might otherwise.

• 52:17Scott Galloway?

  So, you know, fighting with your allies is bad. Fighting without them is worse. When you have allies, you put on a unified front, even when it sucks.

• 52:27Jessica Tarlov?

  Yeah, but I agree with you. I want the President of the United States of America to behave like he's the President of the United States of America, but this is Donald Trump and the American public picked this consciously. And they probably like that they have somebody where they can see what's actually going on behind the scenes or what he perceives to be going on behind the scenes, that this is the most transparent administration in American history, as I'm told regularly.

• 52:56Scott Galloway?

  I spoke to two Democrats last night who are running for president, who haven't officially announced, but take my calls and call me because it's obviously running for president. And I said, the opportunity here is to come out and say, I agree with the action. I don't support the president's policies. I don't support how he's gone about this. He's injected more risk into this than he needed to, but I support the actions and it's important that we rally around our military and the flag and the president in a time like this. Because again, I think the Democrats have fucked up here.

• 53:24Jessica Tarlov?

  Totally. Well, it's the reflexive no. And I mean, maybe we'll hear from those two later in the day, but so far, I haven't really seen that.

• 53:33Scott Galloway?

  Well, the only one who's done it is Fetterman.

• 53:35Jessica Tarlov?

  Well, that's, I assume he was not the one who called you last night.

• 53:39Scott Galloway?

  Fetterman, Fetterman has basically come out and said, you know, look at the action, not the politics. And a lot of people on the, I go to the same place. Whenever the far left and the far right agree on anything, that means we're at negative 40. Negative 40 is where Celsius and Fahrenheit meet. It's inhospitable. Whenever the far left and the far right agree on anything, it's a really bad idea. Whether it's anti-vaccination or isolationism, whatever it is, you know it's a really bad idea. And when you have Marjorie Taylor Greene and AOC agreeing on something, it means you should probably agree with the other way. And they're both agreeing, you know, they're both spouting off, in my opinion, this isolationist, you know, in my opinion, very dangerous bullshit. And I, again, I come back to the same place.

• 54:24Scott Galloway?

  And I apologize, I'm being redundant here. Why on earth are we spending the GDP of Argentina on our military? If we're not going to exert this kind of power?

• 54:34Jessica Tarlov?

  Well, we're always going to exert it. We're just going to complain about it. Or some people are going to feign outrage and say, you know, we're not these people. And the truth is, is that we are fundamentally these people. But I just want to say, I'm the Fetterman front. And while I agree with some of his positions, he's just completely lockstep with Israel. He doesn't even acknowledge what's going on in Gaza as a humanitarian disaster. So John Fetterman is out on an island on his own when it comes to these kinds of actions. So we'll see what the mainstream of the party does. But I think it's totally an opportunity, again, to sound like a normal human being, to meet people where they are and to rally around the flag.

• 55:19Scott Galloway?

  So by the way, I almost forgot. Our little girl, I could not be more proud of you than if you were up reading the Torah. Oh, my God. Donald Trump, personal attack on our very own, literally a badge of honor. Donald Trump came out and mentioned you by name, saying that on Truth Social, "Why does Fox News allow failed TV personality Jessica Tarlov to soil The Five? Oh, my God, you're ruining The Five." Even, even Fox viewers, who are about 105 and fucking crazy,

• 56:03Scott Galloway?

  love you, love you, literally love you. Her voice, her manner, and above all else, what she says are a disgrace. You're a disgrace, Jess.

• 56:12Jessica Tarlov?

  So I hear.

• 56:13Scott Galloway?

  ...to television broadcasting while claiming the network is alienating MAGA supporters by giving her airtime regal. I could not. Be more proud of you. This is a big, I know you thought when I called you and said, I wanted to do a show with you, you thought this is my big moment, but this is your big moment. Ladies and gentlemen, Jessica Tarlov.

• 56:37Jessica Tarlov?

  Soiling the five.

• 56:39Scott Galloway?

  There you go. What did you think when you saw that?

• 56:42Jessica Tarlov?

  It took my breath away.

• 56:43Scott Galloway?

  Took your breath away?

• 56:44Jessica Tarlov?

  Yeah. Well, he's, he's posted about me before, but not quite as meanly. And I was just thinking, why aren't you busier? And then, this was Friday, early evening, I'm thinking, we started sending, the B2 bombers left a few hours later. Like, you really should have been busier.

• 57:08Scott Galloway?

  And he's focused on you.

• 57:10Jessica Tarlov?

  Yeah. I mean, he was watching the show and The Times has reported that TV coverage, specifically on Fox, has informed his view on getting involved and that he wanted to be part of the action, had a bit of FOMO when it came to what the Israelis were able to pull off. But it's something. To have that happen, it's a very uncomfortable feeling.

• 57:34Scott Galloway?

  Oh, okay. Hold on, hold on, hold on. Let me just break it down for you.

• 57:38Jessica Tarlov?

  Yeah.

• 57:38Scott Galloway?

  This is the biggest, I think this is arguably, other than, of course, meeting Scott Galloway, I think this is the biggest thing to happen to you. Because in the midst of a, probably the biggest geopolitical event of his career, he takes time to shitpost you, which absolutely means every senator in Congress would kill to have the president call them out by name. Because when he disagrees with you, it basically means you're doing something right. And you are now more in his head than anyone who's running for president. He doesn't give a shit what Senator Schumer thinks or says. He's not worried about Governor Newsom running for president. He's worried about you. I, I, I think this is.

• 58:21Scott Galloway?

  I'm very excited. I'm very excited. This made my day when I saw this.

• 58:25Jessica Tarlov?

  I was surprised not to hear from you, though.

• 58:27Scott Galloway?

  You know me, I don't like.

• 58:29Jessica Tarlov?

  No text from Scott? I got some good texts.

• 58:31Scott Galloway?

  I don't like to talk to people.

• 58:32Jessica Tarlov?

  No, you don't. It's awful.

• 58:34Scott Galloway?

  Yeah, I don't like to talk to people.

• 58:35Jessica Tarlov?

  I feel desperate sometimes with the amount of times that I've texted with no response. Sometimes I get a thumbs up, but I'm like, I'm just gonna keep doing it.

• 58:43Scott Galloway?

  I'm the, I'm the Hermes of fake intellects in that it's all about scarcity. It's all about managing fake scarcity. I'm an elite university that rejects people more than I could to give the impression of some sort of value or scarcity. It's all an act.

• 58:57Jessica Tarlov?

  I'm gonna defund you over that. It's not cool.

• 59:00Scott Galloway?

  It's all an act. And again, I wish I'd figured this out when I was in my mating years. Okay, I think we should end it there. I think we're gonna watch Jessica Tarlov take a victory lap. I think we're gonna see her on the medal podium, living rent-free in President Trump's head because she is so articulate, so unafraid, so bold, so numero cinco in the Five, the most-watched program in the world as one person who the president is listening to. It's not the Senate Minority Leader, it's not Leader Jeffries, it's not Tom Friedman. Literally, the most important person in the world with President Trump right now is Bibi Netanyahu.

• 59:44Scott Galloway?

  Number two, ladies and gentlemen, running through the tape, collecting the gold, bronze, and silver of people shaping geopolitical conversations around the world. That's right, the co-host of Raging Moderates. If we are not number one this week, literally, I am going to weep crocodile tears while listening to Meg and Kelly. I'll be so upset. This is a big moment for you, Jess. We're gonna leave it there. All right, let's read us out. That's all for this episode. Thank you for listening to Raging Moderates. Our producers are David Toledo and Eric Genikis. Our technical director is Drew Burrows. Going forward, you'll find Raging Moderates every Wednesday and Friday. Subscribe to Raging Moderates on its own feed to hear exclusive interviews with sharp

• 1:00:28Scott Galloway?

  political minds you won't hear anywhere else. This week, Jess. Is talking to Congressman Greg Kassar, who I heard the president does not listen to, nor does not care what he says, because he is not just Darloff. Make sure to follow us wherever you get your podcasts. You don't miss an episode. Keep on soiling, my woman. Keep on soiling.

• 1:00:48Jessica Tarlov?

  Couldn't stop even if I wanted to.

• 1:00:51Scott Galloway?

  All right.