Welcome to today's podcast sponsored by Hillsdale College. All Things Hilldale at Hillsdale dot ed or I encourage you to take advantage of the many free online courses there, and of course I listen to the Hillsdale Dialogue all of them at Q for Hillsdale dot com or just biogle, Apple iTunes and Hillsdale Glory and Immigration America.
I'm Hugh Hewett.
On this Thursday, Jacksmith, former special prosecutor of Donald Trump, had his day being prosecuted by the House Oversight Committee. Today, here's Jim Jordan of Ohio talking with America Javert Jack Smith cut number two.
Due and Miss Trimer Yo Beeck to you. Jenlmal yields back.
Mister Smith is Cassidy Hutchinson a liar. She was their star witness January sixth committee, their star witness in one of those staged and choreographed hearings they paid the former president of ABC News to put together. She was in fact the only witness at this special prime time hearing Tuesday, June twenty eighth, twenty twenty two, eight o'clock in the.
Evening, and she told some stories. I mean these were these were some stories she.
Talked about President lungsed across the back seat, grabbed the steering wheel, tried to drive the car to the Capitol. And I just want to know you think she was lying?
Chereman Jordan. My assessment of that particular issue is that, with respect to the testimony about someone lunge of the president lunging towards the driver, my recollection of her testimony about that is that it was secondhand. She said she'd heard that from somebody.
You familiar with the name of Tony Ornado? I'm sorry, Do you familiar with the name Tony Ornado?
Yes?
White House Deputy Chief of Operations, Deputy cheap of Staff for Operations, right.
You know you remember what he said.
About it, as I said here right now, I do not.
Yeah, he said it didn't happen. How about Bob, you familiar with that name? Yes, I am Secret Service agent who was actually in the car that day. You know what he said, He said it didn't happen. And they both said the first time they ever heard this story was when miss Hutchinson testified in the prime time hearing as their star witness of the January sixth committee. By the way, do you ever confirm her testimony about this particular incident.
We conducted, as I said before, our own independent investigation of all aspects of the case that we thought was relevant. We attorneys from my office.
Did you ever confirm it?
That's a simple question.
Well, we interviewed her, I should say, attorneys in my office.
Bill, do you ever confirm the president leaping across the seat, grabbing the steering wheel, this whole concoction she brought up in the January sixth hearing, Do you ever confirm.
That we interviewed another firsthand witness who was in the car who did not confirm that that could happen.
But also your deposition to the committee last month, mister Smith, you said this my recollection with miss Hutchinson was a number of the things that she gave evidence on were secondhand hearsaying your remembers making that statement to us last month in the deposition, I.
Did, and I was referring particularly to what we're talking about now.
Yeah, And you also said miss Hutchinson regarding this particular claim was a second or even third hand witness. We ask you, if you were a defense attorney, how would you handle cross examining her if she was on the witness stand, And you said, if I were a defense attorney, Miss Hutchinson were a witness, the first thing I would do was seek to preclude her testimony because it was here say you remember saying all that.
Yes, that's correct, sir, that's correct?
Right?
Were you gonna put her on the witness stand if you ever got to trial.
We had not made final determinations as to who we were going to call as a witness. We had a large were still considering her. We had a.
Large ar choice of witnesses in this Are you familiar what Washington Post reporters Carol Lenning and Aaron Davis said in their book? They did his book three hundreds on pages book on chronicle and the whole investigation of the Justice Department, And.
Here's what they said.
On page three to ten, they said Jack Smith had wondered whether some of Hutchinson's claims might be relied upon a trial. Still, at one point, Smith told the elections team he wasn't ready to give.
Up on Hutchinson's account.
Ultimately, however, Trump administration officials uniformly fiercely disputed her accounts under oath. Prosecutors on your team told Smith they wouldn't want to use Hutchinson as a witness in court, and Smith agreed. Are Carol Lennig and Aaron Davis who wrote this?
Are they? Lion?
My recollection is that I certainly had not made any final determinations about in who we were going to call.
And that's the point.
That is the point, the fact.
That point check Brandon Gill, Congressman from Texas made more points cut number three.
Yes, sir, we did, Yes, you did.
And the subpoena covered the time period between November twenty twenty and January twenty twenty one.
Is that right?
I'm sorry, sir, Could you say that again?
We're not going to delay like this. The subpoena covered the time period between November of twenty twenty and January twenty twenty one. How many days after Kevin McCarthy was sworn in his speaker did useupoena his records?
I don't recall, but those two things had nothing.
It was well sixteen days after becoming the highest ranking Republican in the House of Representatives, usubpoenaed his toll records. Do you agree that that might reasonably be considered a violation of the speech or debate clause.
I do not, and I want to be clear that the toll.
We were collecting month's worth of phone data on the Republican Speaker of the House, the leader of the opposition, right after he got sworn in his speaker, all around the time of a major vote. That sounds like a flagrant violation of the speech or debate clause to me, and I think most people agree with me. And Speaker McCarthy had no recourse, did he, because you issued a non disclosure order ensuring that neither he nor any of the American people knew about the subpoenas.
Is that right?
The toll record, the non content toll record subpoena is we did secure non disclosure orders for those subpoenas.
You did.
And let me ask you, mister Smith, at the time you secured those non disclosure orders.
Was Speaker McCarthy a flight risk?
The non disclosure order was based on concerns about it.
Was Speaker McCarthy a flight risks?
He was not?
He was not.
Then why did your non disclosure order refer to him as a flight risk? It says right here the court finds reasonable grounds to believe that such disclosure will result in flight from prosecution.
Sir, when securing a non disclosure order, the risks don't have to associated.
I think the Speaker of the House is a risk this question? No, this is not your time. This is my time. You think the Speaker of the House is a flight risk? You think he's going to hop on a plane and leave the country.
No.
What I was trying to explain is, with respect to a non disclosure order, the risks aren't necessarily associated with the subscriber to the phone, the risks to litigation.
I think that you were using this is clearly in reference to Speaker McCarthy, and you were using clearly false information to secure a non disclosure order to hide from Speaker McCarthy and from the American people the fact that you were spying on his toll records. But I've got more more, so let's move on. And May of twenty twenty three, you also issued subpoenas for toll records of nine US senators.
And an additional representative is that.
Right in May of twenty three, we did issue.
You did, and there were non disclosure orders in conjunction with those subpoenas as well.
That's correct, consistent with Department policy law.
So again, nobody would know what you were doing.
The Senators would, and the representatives would, and the American people wouldn't know what you were doing.
Is that right?
The toll records that we secured in the non disclosure orders were consistent with policy.
And you knew whenever you were doing that that there was a risk you were violating the speechure debate clause.
Is that right?
The toll record subpoenas that we secured. Where with the concurrence of the public.
Context, your own analysis says that you knew there was a risk you were violating the speech or debate clause.
I have it right here.
This is an email from John Keller at Public Integrity Section to your team. As you are aware, quote, as you are aware, there is some litigation risk regarding whether compelled disclosure of toll records of a member's legislative calls violates the speechure debate clause in the DC circuit. That's from your own analysis right there. So you did know, didn't you.
So with respect to the item you just put up on the screen, the last sentence states.
Uh, oh, we're going to get to the last sentence. Okay, We're going to get to the last sentence, and you signed case long here. Quote the bar on compelled disclosure is absolute, is right?
Is that right?
Or do you think that you didn't have to abide by that precedent?
To be clear, this is not this statement is not from my office. This is the statement.
This is This is your justification for those subpoenas and indios that you ordered. This was part of your analysis. It's a cursory analysis. I think it's worth noting. Let's get to that last sentence then. Quote, given my understanding of the low likelihood that any of the members listed below would be charged, the litigation risk should be minimal here. In other words, you're using a novel legal theory, which you knew was novel, has never been tested by any court.
You're not charging any of these members. Nobody is going to.
Know about it because you issued INNDOS.
Nobody is going to sue about it, So sue this, So who cares?
We're going to do it.
Anyways, You walked all over the Constitution throughout.
This entire process, the gentlemen's times led members.
Of Congress, and you know it. It's absolutely disgraceful.
It is absolutely disgraceful. It goes on and on. Jack Smith was a rogue prosecutor who did great damage to the constitution in the political process of the United States. He is the javert from Ley Mees.
He is.
He never to prosecute anyone again. He never to prosecute at President Trump, he was unconstitutionally appointed. It was as was held by the District court in Florida. Never appealed because the case was dismissed after President trump one reelection. Jack Smith and his team a disgrace to justice in the United States. I'll be right back on the huge US show quarter Back of America. I'm Hugh Hewittt. Noah
Rothman is with National Review, where he's a senior writer. Noah, I'm going to go from least important and most important subjects today. First, the Oscar nomination came out. I want to run through the list of the best pictures and just get a yes or no from you whether you've gone to them. Frankenstein, no Hamnet, No the Secret Agent, no sentimental value.
No, you might be detecting a trend of sinners.
Nop F one.
Believe it or not. No, trained dreams what I guess Trained dream nope, Marty Supreme.
Unsadly no, and I kind of do want to see that one one battle after another.
Nope. And finally Bogonia.
A big no.
So you're over ten. You're over ten. I've got a lot of.
Gu Lastly, if I've seen the same television show I've watched ten times with my wife if on the couch at nine o'clock, I know, but I tell you everything that happens in that one show.
I don't think you're the problem. I think Hollywood's the problem. And I'm gonna I'm going to test that. I have you Eleana Johnson, Jim Talent, Josh crossh Hour, and Jim Garrity to ask today and me and I only saw IF one Formula one race.
I want to see I want to see Sinners, I want to see IF one, and I do want to see Marty Supreme.
But you have a passed. This is why the movie business. Well, I'm culturally illiterate.
That's it really is on me too.
Well, no, it's not. You're on every day on the editor. You're right about stuff. They have not drawn you into the theater. That's the problem. You make taste all right. Now, second second, big issue Greenland and the deal. I think it's significant, but a lot of people want to say it's nothing. I think, and I'm going to tell you this before you answer. I think they're putting there, dislike the President, ahead of the realities of the Golden Dome.
What do you think.
Yeah, well, listen, it's not nothing, but it doesn't really See, it does not seem to.
Be what the President retailed.
Yesterday he was stipulating that and attributing to Mark Ruta, a NATO Secretary General, that they had secured some deal for functional sovereignty to be seated in parts of Greenland to the United States. And I was on with the Times of London today. I've been serving international media for long for a while today and Mark Ruta denies it. The Danish government strenuously insists that they had not and
would not agree to such a deal. Nobody can confirm that, so or left with minileral rights and new basing and the deployment of anti missile technology, all which is very important and very valuable. I struggled to see how we couldn't have gotten that through a process that was much less hostile, much more deliberative, and not so injurious to America's reputation with its allies in Europe.
Yeah, I like the process.
I like I don't mind injuring allies in Europe because I don't think we did. I think they're they're pressed people did well.
Then we do agree.
Hugh, you're not saying you like being hostile to Europe for hostility's sake. You're saying that that's just simply not the case.
Yeah.
I think it's simply not the case. I think that they've got a lot of people who are wringing their hands, and in fact they're glad they don't have to get into a fight with Trump because Trump would have won, and he just did it the developer way. Developers are not new to me. I've represented in my whole life. That's the developer way. Now, the most important thing, do you believe President Trump is going to order a strike on Iran?
And should he?
I think he should.
I think the odds are better than even that he will. I wrote about this today. The President said, you know, at the Davos conference during the Peace Board presentation that they want to talk. Aran wants to talk, and we're going to talk to them. And we've heard that before, but it doesn't come to anything, and it does strike me as a faint given the amount of hardware that we're sending into the Gulf region. We have the Ibraham Lincoln,
which is deployed from the Western Pacific. It's going to be joined now apparently by the Gerald, the George W. Bush, which left Norfolk on its way allegedly to the Mediterranean.
So we're going to have a lot of hardware as well.
As support aircraft and combat aircraft like at fifteen. So if there are talks, then we're going to have a lot of hardware to back it up.
But what is there to talk about.
Yeah, I've been cautioned by the program that the Bush might be out on c trials and might not be going in the med So I want to make sure that people understand there's a question about that. I want them to strike simply because a punitive strike they're not going to get regime change. But we ought to set up a standard. If you murder fifteen thousand of your own people with machine guns in the street, you're going to get hit by asked. Because we're the West, that's
why I don't think we'll get regime change. But I think we ought to set a standard. What's your argument for doing it?
Well, I'm typically leery of messaging strikes like that. I think they should have a strategic rationale as well as a tactical rationale, and I think these strikes would have a strategic and tactical rationale. Beyond that, the president has a self set red line. He has said many, many times that one of Barack Obama's biggest mistakes was not following through in his self set red line in twenty twelve, and I think Barack Obama might even agree with the
President on that assessment. So he is obligated, in my view, to do what the Wall Street Journal observed when it published Oragachi's op ed this week to make note of the fact that Iran his thumbing its nose at Trump's red line, and it's incumbent on him to enforce it or sacrifice his prestige in America's in the process. But I don't think that this is just a messaging strike.
If we were to attack the siege ier GC installations, the objective there would be to weaken the regime and reignite the protest movement, which is part of America's overall grand strategy which is collapsing this regime.
Well, I think the regime's going to collapse on its own.
I would blow up carg Island, but I am not a military target Chare and there are people who study where their weakest points are. I don't know what the target listed, but I would do.
But wouldn't that royalty oil markets. Wouldn't that teriphy the administration?
It would that they're sixty dollars the town.
And we've got new sources coming on in the United States from Venezuela and from Canada, and I don't think that they set to China primarily. The one response I got from again an unnamed person, was that you could invite China in to Iran if you did that, because they rely so much on Iranian oil, and that that's a major escalation with China.
I understand. That's why I'm not.
Coming up with it. But I do believe in a purely punitive strike. When a non nuclear nation mows down fifteen thousand people, you know, the American equivalent.
If we had a.
Real fascist, a real authoritarian that did something like this, that would be sixty to seventy thousand people it's astonishing how many people they killed.
Yeah, no, it's a massacre and unspeakable massacre. And then maybe ongoing. We just don't have a lot of information still coming out of Iran. But I struggled to see how these protests that there were so vehemence last week have been completely pacified. So the atrocities are ongoing. But back to carg Island, there are side effects, unintended consequences that can result from the decimation of the Iranian oil program.
If we're taking Venezuela offline and we take a Ran offline, and that is the goal of our strategy, if it collapses regime, we don't want a regime that's selling oil and energy products to our competitors like Russia and China. Eventually China will be squeezed and starved. If our policy is successful, it will be starved of energy. So we should be contemplating what that looks like and not afraid of the outcomes of what that looks like, because that
is the objective here. Is it not well be starting energy of regimes.
I think they would have to buy energy on the white market, and that the price of oil might increase marginally, and it might help our balance of trade, and there's no reason to think that it will become Japan nineteen thirty seven to nineteen forty one.
That's the big fear.
Yeah, that we've shortened the window of opportunity for action in the South Chancy.
And there is no need for that because China. A war would be China's choice, and they have not done the things. They're not ready to go to war with us, and they're not ready to take Taiwan, no matter how many demonstrations they have.
Vandillah Rothman.
I'm glad that you are Oh for ten because it can't get any worse today for Hollywood.
Thank you do.
I'll be right back in America. Stay tum, Welcome back in America. I'm Hugh Hewitt. For the first time, I don't know in years, I've missed two commentary podcasts back to back. So my next guest Eleana Y Johnson, who's a regular contributor to Commentary, I haven't heard her voice in three days. Eleon is also the editor in chief of the Washington Free Beacon, which you ought to be reading every morning
at Freebeacon dot com. Eli On a three parts to today's interview part number one ten yes or no questions because the Oscar List came out number one.
Have you seen Frankenstein?
I Hugh, I'll spare you time. I haven't seen anything.
You're zero for ten. I make up for my.
Zero for ten by having seen the Oongebob movie three times with my four year old.
Okay, that's about it. Okay, I'll make it different. Have you heard of the following movie Frankenstein?
Yes, Hamnet No, never heard of it.
The Secret Agent.
Heard of it.
Sentimental Value never heard of it. Sinners heard of it. F One never heard of it. Trained Dreams never heard of it. Marty Supreme heard of it for sure.
My colleague John Ortz gave it a rave review. We did talk about that one on the podcast.
Okay, one battle after another, Nope and Bogonia. Now, how bad is Hollywood marketing when you haven't even heard of.
Six of the ten best pictures of the year?
I mean, Hugh, the one movie I will say that I can't. I have to say, I can't even tell you if it was this year was the Bob Dylan movie.
I saw Bob Dylan too, that was two years ago.
That's it.
Tears the only movie that I've seen in the theater in recent.
Memory to the kids are too young for Zootopia? Is that the problem?
A little bit young? I've been trying to nudge my daughter there and she's been saying, no, I want to go back to SpongeBob and I did look it up and it said it's more like a sixth.
Seventh do so No. I took two three year olds to it. Do not do it, do not do it? All right?
Yeah, three films focused on Gaza war and hostage crisis nominated for oscars, Israel's butcher staying children know more where and are gone?
And then one.
Called, uh, the voice of hin Rajab about the death of a five year old Palestinian.
Do you want to bet which wins?
Oh?
Can all three walk away with the wards?
Because I think that's what would happen if the oscars could do it. And I look forward to the demonstrative protests by the winners while they're up on stage and the absolute silence on the butchery of the Iranian regime.
Yeah, fifteen thousand.
I'm coming to, in fact, out reverse order of my question because you brought it up. Should President Trump strike as a purely punitive measure. I do not have hopes for regime change. I don't want a bombing campaign. I just want to strike them, because you shouldn't mow down fifteen thousand of your people.
And will he strike, well, I think he should strike in an effort for regime change in Iran, not simply as a punitive measure, but because it's in the American interests. And for about the past ten days, you I've believed strongly that the window for American action is not closed. In the days after President Trump issued his threats and the Iranian leaders were sort of thumbing their noses, and there are a lot of people saying he drew a
red line, he's not enforcing it. That may yet turn out to be true, But I think we're working on a bit of a longer timeline. There's enough fifteen squadron and aerial refueling tankers heading to the region, and I tend to think President Trump is waiting for the right time here. And at the same time, the conditions that led to these protests, the economic emiseration and the fact that the Iranian currency is not worth the paper that it's printed on, are.
Not changing.
Now we've got real.
Problems, and I think I do think the President is going to pick his moment, and I hope he does.
I think he's going to.
But we have to do different kinds of strike punity, meaning there's a guardrail here.
You don't machine gun your own people, and.
Then regime destabilization paps change as with Serbia, as with Libya. That would be a sustained air campaign. Do you think he's got the.
Will to do that.
I mean, he's got iron will, but I don't think he's in the bombing campaign.
Business, do you.
I'm not sure. You know. Predicting the actions of this president is tough. The latter, the regime destabilization, regime decapitation is obviously more difficult than the former, but I wouldn't put it past this president. And Hugh, I would note the Wall Street Journal report last night that this regime is looking that this president Trump is looking at regime change in Cuba.
So I think it's totally.
And I think the two are connected because what underlies both of these things, as well as the maduro rate in Venezuela, is that we can totally discard the notion that this president doesn't is not concerned with matters beyond our shores. I think he's looking at legacy building, and I think he knows that the way he acts on
Iran is intimately connected with his legacy. And when he went out and did that press conference on Maduro announcing that they had captured him, he cited it in a line of foreign policy actions, including the killing of custom Sulimani and Operation Midnight Hammers. So I would say, now, those three things are the things he's proud of, st Off, and he may be looking to add a fourth and a fifth with another strike on Iran and in Cuba.
It's clear this is where his mind is though, and you could add Greenland to that too.
I am going to I think is a big deal, Elianna, and I want your quick take on it, because Noah Rothman doesn't think it's a big deal.
I think it's a big deal.
Oh you know, I don't know if we know yet, Hugh. On the one hand, the president may have seen the doo and the markets and climb down with some kind of phony deal. I think that's the point no On some of his colleagues at National Review we're making. On the other hand, it may be that Rubio and the Vice President and others negotiate American sovereignty over bases in Greenland, and we really do get a dear deal for rare
earth minerals. I myself, I don't have a real knowledge of where this is going to end up, but I'm for it. I'm for the sovereignty over the basis.
I'm for the Golden Dome, and I'm for protecting the two hundred and thirty mile exclusive economic zone, which US sovereignty over some of the bases would give us the right to.
Patrol and protect.
And that's something that I don't think a lot of people know about the law.
They see.
Hey, Eleana Y Johnson, follow on exit Eleana Y Johnson. Go see Bob sponge Pants again and again and again until you can repeat every line.
In the movie.
Because that's what I did when I was your age, Eleanor good to say you, thank you. I'll be right back in America. Stay tuned back in America. I'm q hewittt former United States Senator Jim Tallent. There's a senior fellow at the Reagan Institute for Peace through Strength.
Hello, Jim, how are you?
I am doing well. Mis she Ewett, how are you good.
We're gonna play twenty question.
The twenty questions have to do with the ten movies nominated for Best Movie of the Year by the Academy today, and the questions are have you heard of it? And have you seen it? For each each movie movie. Number one Frankenstein, have you heard of it? Have you seen it? No?
And no? And I'm afraid a lot of my answers are going to be along those lines.
All right. Number two Hamnet.
Hamnet?
Hamnet?
Is that Hamlet misspelled?
No, that's that's Hamlet with Hamlet, that's Hamlet with it in it Hamnet?
No, definitely, no, and no.
The Secret Agent.
No, I like the song from the sixties Secret Agent.
That doesn't count for hearing about it, So that's a no on the movie.
How about I used to jog to that song?
How about sentiment sentimental value?
No, I haven't seen it, No idea what it is? No sinners, sinners, No sounds intriguing.
No.
Might catch it on streaming in a couple of years.
Here's the best opportunity I've f one.
Now. I didn't see it, but I recognized that my wife wanted to see it. Isn't that the one with Brad Pitt.
Yes, there you go. You got one out of we got one thus far. Train dreams, train dreams.
No, no, no, Marty Supreme, Marty Supreme.
That's that draws another blank.
No, no, one battle after another, and they're not talking about reconciliation.
I've heard of that one.
Okay.
I saw a couple of articles. I saw a couple of articles, and I actually watched part of a video saying how terrible the movie was.
That's two out of twenty, two out of eighteen. And finally, Begonia, Begonia.
I'm making this.
Wasn't that a country? Wasn't that a country? An old Marx Brothers movie?
I don't know, but you're you are two under twenty.
You're better, by the way as Fredonia.
You're better than Eliotta Johnson and Noah Rothman. So at least you get heard of two of these movies. Jim, what's wrong with Hollywood?
I used to go to.
Two movies a week until like five years ago before COVID. Yeah.
I think it's a combination of economics controlled by people who don't care about the quality of the movies. Whatever you think about the old Hollywood system, I mean the men who ran it were ruthless, but they really didn't care about producing good movies. And then of course the whole there obsession with woke topics and messaging and the rest of it has really interfered with the creative instincts that they used to have.
Right now, it's let me get to the last movie I saw.
The last movie I saw was god Zilla Minus one, which was very good.
You guess Japanese I missed that too, all right, very from very silly Hollywood, very serious. Should President Iran strike Iran? And willie President President Trump?
Okay, I think he should any any and I think he will. But let me let me go into the background or the reasoning for that. I mean, the reason to do it. There are two reasons to do it. One is because we said we would, and I think it's important to sustain our credibility. And the second is if it's done properly, it could further weaken the regime. The reason not to do it, you is that the rest of the Middle East is really going well now. I mean, we're in phase two, which I think we
really have Hamas behind the eight ball. I mean, the Lebanese president just said, you know, Hesbala's got to disarm, got to leave. Syria and Israel are negotiating closer terms, and so you know the old legal saying, when the judge is going your way, you know, just be quiet. And so there's a danger that if we hit Iran it could disrupt some of those activities, which is one of the reasons evidently our allies and partners have urged us not to do it.
Now.
I think what the President's eventually going to do is hit them in some very targeted way, but something that will hurt them uniquely without disrupting the region, kind of when he took out Cassin Solomani when was that two thousand.
And yeah, early early twenty memory of the talent.
I think he'll do.
I hope he hits carg Island, But people tell me their reason not to the A Meet Segal, very very serious Israeli analysts said one of the second order consequences of President Trump obliterating the Iranian nuclear program was to drive Saudi Arabia further away from the Abraham Accords because they no longer need them. I had not considered that before, but it meets a very good reporter. What do you think about that.
Yeah, I think it's I think it's very possible. I believe Dwayne and I have discussed that on the pod that one of the ironic outcomes of the real successes over the last year is that is that the Gulf States have less of a reason. I mean, they're less afraidive Iran now, but personally, and you might want to ask him eat this is. You know, the Saudis are
not stupid, and they know what President Trump wants. He wants the Abraham Accords to be expanded, and there are things they want and so by engaging in this kind of a tactic, being a very reluctant partner in that respect, they're probably hoping to get more. You know, there are other countries besides the United States that are good at pursuing their own interests. We don't see that very much in Europe, but we do see it in the Middle East.
So that's what I suspect, because I think NBS wants economic development for the country, he wants stability in the region, he wants to modernize Saudi Arabia, and all of that is advanced by the right kind of agreements with Israel, which may or may not be a formal recognition. That doesn't matter that much all, I think if we just continue.
So my last question is what do you make of the Greenland outline as the President describe it, Provided it's accurate.
I like it and wrote a great column about it, you know, because he actually read the National Security Strategy, which in discussing Western hemisphere I think mentions five times
critical supply chains, the importance of military readiness. This whole episode, this whole exercise for the last year, has been about sending a signal that we're very interested in the Arctic and we're going to pursue our claims there, that we're very interested in showing up our supply chains, and Greenland is an important part of that, and that we're going to protect our hemisphere and pursue our own interests. And we got an agreement. I don't know exactly what's in it,
but we'll have more freedom to operate militarily. We'll have better access to the rare earths in Greenland, and that's more than we had. So, you know, I don't think President Trump ever really cared about getting sovereignty over Greenland. He wants to integrate Greenland into America's national security strategy
for the Western Hemisphere. So you know, I'll wait to see exactly what's in it, but it's got to be better than what we had before, and I don't think we would have gotten it if we hadn't combined this pressure tactics with the negotiations.
Jim Tallon always good.
To talk with someone who actually thinks about national security on a daily basis. Jim Talent can be followed on x at Jim Talent follow me to the next segment of Today's Hewit.
Welcome Back America.
You Hewitt inside the Relief Factor Studio West. I don't have to deal with what's coming at Josh Cross. Are going to be a bad weekend in the Beltway, Josh, you're ready for it.
You know, we haven't had a snowmageddon as they call it here in about a decade. So the way the forecasters, you guys know, you know in Ohio, you know that you're you're used to that kind of snow, but we haven't had more than a foot of snow in a long time.
So I think the snow is better than icy rain. So take the snow.
Uh.
I have a drill, Josh, before we get.
To the real story.
I want to know if you have heard and then seen the ten movies nominated for Best Picture. So heard of and seen Frankenstein Yeah, No, no one.
No, no, No, you're Hamnett.
Hamnet never even heard of it.
The Secret Agent.
No, and No.
Sentimental Value no one, No Sinners, no one, no f one, no one, No Trained Dreams.
No. I also haven't heard of that one either.
Marty Supreme, Yes, yes, and yes, Oh you've seen it.
Yes, it's it's it's very good.
Yeah, I've seen it too. Okay, so that's what. That's a hit though, one battle after another.
No, but I actually that's on my weekend snow watch lists.
So that's a yes. No, yes. And Bogonia no no. So you're three out.
Of twenty and that's better than Noah Rothman, Eleana Johnson and Jim Tallon.
So what's that tell you about Hollywood and movies?
Well, the disconnect between what's nominated for the Oscars and what and I, Hugh, I actually try to see some of the artsier critically acclaimed, you and me both, but some of the ones I had not even heard of. At least half of the I think three or four of the ones you mentioned. I would want to make a shout out for a song. I'm surprised song song Blue was not nominated, because I like that was one of the better I know, I liked it.
But they're not going to nominate things that people like, and therefore they're not going to get oscars and no one's ever going to hear of them. All right, let me move on if I can, Josh to the big story. Do you think President Trump is going to strike Iran? And should he?
If you asked me that a couple of days ago, I would have been more bullish given the comments made by the President and a lot of his inner circle. But at Davos, Steve Woodoff seemed to suggest that they were going to be looking at a diplomatic option, and that rhetoric was echoed by the President this morning and announcing the Board of Peace.
And you know, it just feels like Trump. Trump is very.
Responsive to the headlines of the news, to the visuals coming out of social media, and it does feel like that even though we have moved military assets into the Middle East and were prepared more so than we may have been a week ago, it doesn't seem like right now the administration is ready to strike. I admit I could be surprised. The President had surprised me before, but it just doesn't seem based on public comments from both the President.
Yeah, I was trying to ask you if you do not remember, because I also fell for the head fake last June when Midnight Hammer dropped, and I completely fell for the head fake on Operation Absolute Resolve in the Duro.
I mean I just did.
Yeah, Yeah, I mean, look, I I hesitate to make predictions for that very reason, and I certainly I mean, Trump has sort of gone back and forth in terms of his rhetoric in the last week on Iran. But look, there's every bit of evidence that that protesters continue to be killed, the human rights disaster, that the you know, the horrible atrocities that took place, that they're fresh in
my mind. But I wonder, given all the news of the last week, whether it was Greenland, whether it was you know, all the all the Davos back and forth, whether that's not quite a quite its front and center in the White House's mind.
Now, let me ask you about Greenland, Josh. There are lots of reactions. I'm I'm I thought Trump made Davos great again because it become kind of a joke and he actually made news there and made it relevant. What did you think about the Greenland deal and the Davos trip.
Look, I this seems to be a pattern with Trump, and not always in the best of ways, foreign policy wise, where we kind of create a chaotic situation, end up backing down, coming up to some compromise, and kind of getting back as we were.
You know, in square one, we're still kind of learning.
About the negotiations and the contours of a deal that the US had been that Trump had been talking to Mark Ruta, the NATO Secretary General, about.
Maybe we have more much more economy over.
A military bases in parts of Greenland, but we are you know, this is something.
That could have been handled diplomatically.
There didn't need to be a rupture in the US European relationship to get to the point where we are today.
And I don't think me let me might argue my case, there wasn't a rupture. There was an upset francois Accron, whom nobody cares about. There's an upset EU that has nothing to say about a NATO issue, and the eight members of NATO did not rupture. So I think there's a lot of tds on display here perhaps, and I think it was unfortunate.
I mean, a lot of people are talking about the Canadian Prime Minister's Mark Karney's speech, talking about this rupture, and I can't help but think that he's already been trying to improve build business ties and economic ties to China, which is hard to square his comments the ideal the more idealistic and and strategic comments that Carney made with the Chinese relationship and the inattention to anti Semitism that
Canada has been playing in recent in recent years. So you know, I do think there's a little bit of posturing and a little bit of kind of chest thumping from some of the Europeans, But I also think this is a totally needless provocation, and I think there's no national security Denmark and NATO and the eusually we're all on pretty much the same page, and I think we still are on the same page, aside from all the
threats that that Trump made. That that freaked the heck out of the Scandinavians and the EU, and I don't think that was necessary.
Well said Josh Cross is always following mine act at Josh Crosshower.
Stay tuned, I'll be right back here on the to hew A Show.
Oh Man, God its hosts bow he got hit bumps. But what do you say?
Street got big.
Gym welcome back in America. That music means big. Jim Garretty is in the house with us. Guaranty the indispensable Jim as. You are my cultural reporter. You're rite for the Washington Post, you're rite for National Review. You do the three Marbotini podcast. You're often on the editors podcast for National Review. So you're a man of culture. The Oscars were nominated. The nominations came out this morning. I'm looking for your reactions to the Best Picture, all right, number one, Frankenstein.
I at least heard of that one. Didn't see it, don't expect to see it. Hamnet Okay, And I know that's not a typo. You're not mispronouncing it. It actually is an N, not an L. I have a big I remember seeing it on the box office display. Didn't see it.
The Secret Agent.
That's actually sounds good, but I haven't seen it.
Sentimental value.
You could be making up that one and I would not be able to tell you whether it's.
True or not, not making it up. Wouldn't be wouldn't be prudent, not gonna do it, wouldn't do it, sinners.
Okay, heard of that one. Haven't seen it. Heard people raving about it. It's about vampires in the Old South, So that one I'm not surprised by. At least it permeated some, you know, with Michael B. Jordan as opposed to the other Michael Jordan's.
It received sixteen Oscar nominations. F one.
Okay, actually saw that. I really, yes, really enjoyed it. Kind of almost felt like old fashioned movie making. It's not a groundbreaking story, but just really done. And I saw it right around my birthday and the themes about you know, pursuing greatness but also kind of passing the torch to the new generation. I'll be rooting for that one. I know it's never gonna win.
Brad Pittson, It's not gonna win. Uh, trained dreams.
Again. You can be making that up.
No, not man, you haven't seen that. No, No, all right, no, Marty Supreme.
Okay, heard of that one. Heard people saying good things about it, haven't seen it. I have only the vaguest idea of what it's about don't really unlikely to see it.
I have seen it. They were lying to you one battle after another.
Heard of that one. I hear from the likes of Kyle Smith, who used to be with us at National Review, now over at the Wall Street Journal. Just insufferably overhyped and overdone, and the heavy handed political metaphor and all that stuff. Leonardo DiCaprio, you know, to his credit, throws himself into whatever role he's doing. But you know it's about Trump being bad. So I figured that'll be I didn't know that.
Another reason not to say it. I'd heard of it, But now that I've heard you say that, I won't see it and then begonia, I.
Feel like I might have heard. So is this about the kidnapping of no idea?
Never heard of it? All right, So that's the list.
I have aig familiarity with it.
So I've seen F one and Marty Supreme. I've seen two out of ten. I liked one out of ten, the one that can't win because Brad pitching it. You've seen none. You did see F one, you've seen one out of it's actually one of them, and you've heard of Center. So you've heard one more than I've heard of. So what's that say about the movies? Or what's that say about you? And what's that say about me?
Okay, well, what it says about me is that I generally see action movies, superhero movies, you know, the summer movie types.
Right.
I am not the target audience for most Oscar bait. Doesn't mean I've never enjoyed them. But you know, we all know what oscar bait is. You know, where you're playing a character who's somewhat mentally challenged. And I won't use the line from that Robert Downey Junior did no, but nevertheless, the idea that, like, you know, often it's someone who's trying to stretch as an actor, historical dramas. You know, if you're playing anything with.
Daniel Lewis in it.
Yeah, yep, yeah, like and here's and if you if those movies are your taste, great. You know, very rarely have I seen a Oscar winner argo. I remember seeing a couple of years ago, which kind.
Of you've got robot? Actually do your robot kids go to the movies?
Not that often will go see superhero movies. And we actually felt pretty good about all three of the ones that came out this year, Superman, Fantastic Four, and Thunderbolts. We did not like the Captain America one did not work. But they're like, we're you know, we're of the general mainstream consensus. And for a long time the Marvel movies are about as much fun as you could have in the theaters. And then they did Endgame and it's been very hit and miss since then. They're way back in the day.
I know, I have young grandchildren, so my movie options are very limited. I used to be with the fetching missus Hewett, a two film a week person, when even when my kids are in the house we.
Just loved movie. There aren't any movie.
Jim My point is it's collapsed, and I think this list proves that am I making too much of a point of it.
I don't know if the Oscar selections are the most natural measuring stick, but what is indisputable is what they used to call the middle class of movies, movies that had a budget from like about fifteen million dollars two hundred million dollars. A lot of comedies were in this category. A lot of romantic comedies were in this kind of category.
That that's this basically has disappeared and that this was where you know, Will Smith in Hitch would be that kind of movie, you know with Kevin James or something like that, right.
Like Kevin Goson movie Ever made?
Yes, exactly western. You know that that basically movies are are either you know, small independent made with the almost the money, or they are giant blockbusters that are designed to have a theme park at you know, Universal or Disney or something like that. So I think we will miss these kind of movies.
The movies used to form the culture, and it was my kids grew up on the movies. My grand kinswok grew up on the movies.
I think.
I think I took my daughter to see Titanic ten times when she was fourteen or thirteen. So we got a minute to the break. We'll come back after Oscar's something important. Are they dead dead dead dead dead by streaming and by consensus that the filmmakers have lost their mind?
Or is it just a bad couple of decades.
Quote Billy Crystal in The Princess Bride, He's only mostly dead. They're mostly dead because it now costs about twenty bucks ahead at least where I am to go to the movies. I you know, like you, I'd see movies maybe once a week, once every two weeks, but they only cost seven bucks. The more the ticket costs, the more the movies gotta be good. The more of the movies got to be something where you feel really good from the trailer or the commercial, or you like the book or
something like that. Yeah, it becomes a much bigger risk at twenty bucks ahead.
I'm coming back with a technical question for Garritty because his kids build robots.
And there they're bound from the school on the Charles that actually learned the thing. So stay chimed.
I'm back with Garrity the indispensable A. Gim is my tech consultant, Jim. I have here my iPhone which is many years old with my Cleveland Brown's orange on it.
By the way, that Jets don't get a quarterback.
Sorry, Dante Moore's going home rather than go to the Jets, and I'm gonna get it new one today. Can I say to the person at the Apple help desk, I'm sure this has been hacked and has malware on it. I want my contacts, I want my number, and I don't want any malware. Can they make that work?
Probably not, but they'll try to upsell you something with the much higher caliber spyware.
You're not going to have.
They're not going to have that basic spyware. We're going to give you the premium plus spyware.
Are you telling me I got to get a new phone number in order to dump the spyware because we are talking to the chicoms right now because it's in the studio, and I tell you there's a reason it's not allowed into any building.
So second time that I was in Ukraine, I ran into Tim Mock, who writes a newsletter news site called The counter Offensive, great reporter. Everybody should fow him on Twitter, subscribe to his thing. And he said that, you know, he goes through He was in Ukraine, went to Taiwan. I think he was somewhere else, like Kazakistan or something.
And they tell you if you're going to places like this your cell phone, you know, you figure this is where they're most likely to try to get spyware in there, and they can do it remotely through wireless signals and
stuff like that. So Tim Mack tolds us, I told us he's getting you know, he goes to some professional, high grade caliber person who can find spyware by foreign intelligence or anybody else who's out there trying to put it onto your phone, and he goes, they do the full review, they do the scan, and he is he says, they comes back clean, and he was so pissed. I'm so disappointed that nobody thought he was worth listening in on.
And I kind of feel that kind of way. I kind of feel like if you if you told my phone and you said, Jim, you've been to Ukraine a bunch of times, no Russian spyware, You've been to Taiwan, nothing Chinese, I'd feel a little insulted. I've been told by reliable sources that both of those countries governments have a file on it. That probably just means a file just means they have a paper.
We don't like this guy, so they actually wrote, now, Jim, I know, I know I've got spyware. When people come to the house for dinner who are in the government, they make me put it downstairs under a bunch of wooden crates, and then they still.
I believe that you interview the president fairly regularly. I assume that when they're doing that, they not only scan all your recording equipment, they probably frisk you. I don't know if you feel like you've been to the proctologist. I'm just figuring anything as a full check.
But do the robot kids help do having robot kids help you figure this stuff out?
This is not really their specialty, but I will point out so glad you mentioned it to you, because like we're now deep January, early January is when they get the assignment. So my younger son, I'm never going to get to see them until the first competition. They are building, they are designing. They got electrical stuff to worry about. Uh, I'll get to see them like maybe a month from there.
Do the power fail? Does the light flicker in the house at times?
Thankfully they're not doing it here. Basically, yes, in northern Virginia, the power goes out. I'm really certain AI will become you know, sentient, and it's going to happen because of one of these robot fronts.
Are you by the way, ten seconds do all the robot kids get together? What do they do for fun?
All this?
They are into this and it's someone I may write an article that you've made.
In the world.
You need to write a book. You need to write a book called Robot Kids. Here's your title.
Thank you, America, thank you, and and Adam, thank you, Harley, thank you generally. Shamli'm hu you have come back tomorrow to the next you at show