3/3/26: Scott Horton Unloads On Iran War, MSM Pro-War Propaganda, Kat Abughazaleh On Iran and Ukraine

16:43Krystal Ball:Right. Isn't it funny that that's even a question? We don't know why the president launched this completely unnecessary, unprovoked aggressive war. And we got to like sit here and suss it out through the tea leaves. Do they have video of him raping a child? Is that what it is that beneath all those Epstein redactions is Donald Trump actually committing felonies? Or do they do the Israeli maybe nothing to do with Epstein? Maybe they've just been tapping his phone like they did Bill Clinton. Remember, they tried to blackmail Bill Clinton with Monica Lewinsky before that story ever leaked that we want you to release Jonathan Pollard.

17:13Krystal Ball:And he almost did it. It said that the top ranks of the CIA were all gonna resign over it and cause a huge controversy. But they went to Bill Clinton and said, we got proof you're cheating on your wife, pal. They had no problem trying to blackmail the president then. So it could be that. It also could be that just Donald Trump is good friends with Netanyahu. He's always, you know, his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, obviously always speaks from the Likud point of view. He doesn't know anything else about it. He doesn't know any Palestinians or any Iranians. If he knows any Iranians, they're monarchist expat types, right?

17:42Krystal Ball:He doesn't know anyone to tell him a real contrary point of view on these things, I think is a big part of it. And then, you know, people would always say, oh, Donald Trump, he's so uncouth. You know, he's not from Manhattan, he's from Queens. And he's kind of like, don't get me wrong, he's obviously born very rich, but he has that sort of uncouth working class way of talking or whatever. And they were afraid. Remember, they'd say, I think he's an anti-Semite. Like he one time used the word Jew outside of a reverential tone or whatever. We, you know, we're afraid. I'm like, okay, if there really is any of that kind of like Donald Trump era sort of racism that he grew up in as a New Yorker in that time or whatever, there potentially could be a little bit of that.

18:23Krystal Ball:I don't see that certainly as far as Jews go, but even if that was true, well, how much lower must he consider Arabs then? If that's what a kind of mean or racist he is. If he thinks, you know, he looks down on Jews or other minorities at all. The Palestinians, they're Arabs. They're camel jockeys and sand and words and whatever. You just do with them what you want. It's the same way they created Israel in the first place. Yeah, a bunch of Arabs have to be removed, but so what? It's like talking about removing livestock or something like that. that doesn't affect them morally or whatever. So if Netanyahu says to Trump, man, this could be big and fun and you'll go down in history, Bill Kristol will compare you to Theodore Roosevelt and you'll be great and whatever, then that could be very tempting to Donald Trump.

19:09Krystal Ball:Yeah, it could be all of the above, right? Yeah, something big, something that, you know, he wants to build this giant arch in Washington. So he's remembered as the guy who built the giant arch, you know, like he wants to do something. Wow.

19:23Scott Horton:Scott, as always, man, thank you for joining us. Appreciate you.

19:26Krystal Ball:Absolutely. Thank you both.

19:29Trita Parsi:This is Ashley Iacanetti from the Ben and Ashley I, Almost Famous podcast. iVeam is built for losing weight and moving forward. iVeam is built for feeling your best and seeing real results. iVeam is a medical weight loss program built for you. Their approach is individualized, virtual, integrative medicine. 99.2 % of patients who've completed the iVeam weight loss protocol achieved meaningful change, dropping an average of 45 pounds. iVeam, built for your wellness journey. iVeam, built for real life. When you sign up right now, you can get a one month free trial. Start your personalized plan in minutes by visiting IVIMHealth.com.

20:17Trita Parsi:That is IVIMHealth.com. Subscription required, medication, labs, and supplements not included. Results based on patients who completed the full IV protocol over 68 weeks. Individual results may vary. Not all patients are eligible. Prescription medication may carry risks and should be used only as directed by your provider.

20:40Krystal Ball:CBS Tonight is NCIS Night. New episodes of NCIS, NCIS Origins, and NCIS Sydney. Possible abduction of the Marines. We need to move. Anybody who's a potential target? We're going to do what we do, and we're going to figure out answers. Whatever they're planning, it's going down here.

20:57Scott Horton:NCIS!

20:59Krystal Ball:NCIS Night is all new. It's a night you've never seen. CBS Tonight, starting at 8, 7 Central and streaming on Paramount+.

21:11Trita Parsi:How is TD making banking more human?

21:14Saagar Enjeti:Easy. With less bank talk and more real talk. Less, your call is important to us. And more, how can we help? Less confusion and more clarity. It's things like tapping your phone to use your TD card and getting your paycheck two business days early. It's getting more of what you want. and less of what you don't. That's how TD is making banking more human.

21:40Kat Abughazaleh:All right, guys, we want to carve out a little space to take a look at the overwhelming pro-war media propaganda diet that the American people are being force-fed right now. Let's start with CNN, Dana Bash, with some interesting guests here. Let's take a listen.

21:54Krystal Ball:This is a Berlin Wall moment. Just tear this wall down. Then America will be safe without the Islamic Republic. I love America. I love Iran.

22:03Kat Abughazaleh:Now, Sagar, many people are saying that CNN is set to get worse under the Ellison control. And I do have confidence that Barry will figure out how, but it's going to take some creativity based on what I've seen on that network in the, you know, after this war was launched.

22:17Scott Horton:Look, no disrespect to this. Maybe. Actually, I always say that before. Actually, no disrespect. Like, here's the deal. You know, this woman, I get it. She's an Iranian expat. She wants freedom for her country. I'm like very limited, somewhat sympathetic. My country is not a vessel for you to achieve your ambitions. I forget. I think Bronco said this. America is the only country on earth which has immigrants that come to it to get it to bomb their home country. It's the only place. I've also said this generally about diaspora. And I really mean this. the diaspora are often some of the least informed people, most biased and out of touch about what's going on back home.

22:59Scott Horton:I said that about myself. Do not ask me about what's going on in India. I don't know. I'm from Bryan, Texas. Okay. I barely know what's going on in my own country, let alone to reflect the beliefs of 1 billion people who live across the world. It's ridiculous. And yet, Trita Parsi was telling us this morning that BBC ran an article with three people in Iran, or a soundbite or whatever, three people in Iran where they're like, we're so happy to be bombed, as if that's the only view inside of the country. CNN is trying to project the same thing. Berlin Wall moment. No, it's not. You know, it's a catastrophe for the people in Iran.

23:37Scott Horton:Maybe it'll end up good, but in the immediate term, there's at least over 1 ,000 people who are confirmed to be killed. Yeah. including a bunch of little school children, not to mention all of the other people killed across the region as a result of this embroiling conflict. We don't sit here, good cheer up and down. We don't even know what's going to come next. You're probably cheering on your own civil war and destruction of your own country.

24:00Kat Abughazaleh:It's disgusting. You know, the people to talk to really would, Hey, let's talk to the Iraqis about.

24:05Scott Horton:Yeah, no, you're right.

24:05Kat Abughazaleh:Let's talk to the Afghanis. Let's talk to the, you know, the people of Libya. Let's talk to them about, you know, probably some of them had some hopes and aspirations when some of them did. Yeah, we saw them cheering. Yeah, when we came in, et cetera. How did that go for you? I think that would be, you know, interesting and revelatory to see from our news networks. Let me go ahead and skip over to MS Now with Rachel Maddow. And this was a very interesting segment here because she goes out of her way. And look, I think that is true that some of the Gulf countries, Saudi Arabia in particular, I mean, there is a rivalry there with Iran, right?

24:40Kat Abughazaleh:And there was reporting that Saudi Arabia was also pushing Trump alongside Israel to get into this war with Iran. But let's be very clear. I mean, it's very clear who the primary mover is here, right? It's Israel. I mean, you can listen to the Secretary of State. You can listen to Netanyahu talking about how he's tried in president after president to get someone to do this and finally got Donald Trump to. You can listen to him talk about how this is a fulfillment of a 40-year fantasy that he has held. And so Rachel kind of cleverly decides to all but erase that aspect and instead focus in on these Gulf countries, which are now in flames and being attacked and running out of interceptors and being stonewalled by the United States for any sort of replacements.

25:20Kat Abughazaleh:Let's take a listen to a little bit of that.

25:21Krystal Ball:Who benefits? Who wants Iran bombed off the map and for their own reasons? Who are Iran's rivals and enemies? Perennially, it's the Gulf Arab states. countries like Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates and Qatar. And of course, you remember the Saudis who stuffed another$2 billion into the pockets of Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner. They said, don't worry, Jared will never again work for the U.S. government. He's never coming back to Washington. So it's OK that he's taken all this money from the Saudis now. We will never have to worry about having somebody involved in U.S. policy who has also just been given billions of dollars by Saudi Arabia, apparently for no reason.

26:06Well, that was the

26:07Krystal Ball:explanation when he took all that money from the Saudis at the end of Trump's first term. And now today, who has been leading the negotiations on behalf of the United States government with Iran before we just started this war with them today? I mean, Secretary of State Marco Rubio was in St. Kitts this week. It wasn't him. No, it was Jared Kushner.

26:27Kat Abughazaleh:And I think this will be the, you know, the MSNBC line from a lot of the hosts because this allows them to be anti-war and is much easier to pick on like the politics of picking on Saudi Arabia. And look, they deserve it, like critical Saudi Arabia as well. The politics of that are much easier than focusing your ire. What about the word Israel?

26:47Scott Horton:Israel. Can we all say it? The secretary of state said it. Can we say it? Israel is the primary mover of this conflict. Like, why am I, this makes me feel crazy. And look, we expect bullshit from Fox, but in a time of opposition, the way that you channel that opposition, like with CNN, where like, it's like that Mark Warner initial, they're like, well, but we need to hear a case from the president and the war, and he needs a strategy. It's like, no, there's no strategy. This whole thing is bullshit. It's over. This is bad. They can't, like, look, we saw this during Iraq, you know, with the MSNBC and all that light in the initial years of the war before eventually discovering the Keith Olbermann opposition.

27:26Scott Horton:But we don't want to get to that point. Let's just not get there in the first place. I will at least give the politicians credit. They're ahead of like the media in this case. Mark Warner and Ruben Gallego, you know, these are like centrists as they come.

27:38Kat Abughazaleh:Gallego's trying to pivot. Gallego's definitely trying to make a pivot. He just endorsed Graham Plattner as well. But yeah, I mean, they -

27:44Scott Horton:Even they though are like, this is Israel's war. They're calling him, they're like, we're being walked around on a leash. I mean, this is like 4chan's, you know, Zog posting from like five years ago. You know what I mean?

27:55Kat Abughazaleh:I know it is crazy to hear Mark Warner in particular, when I heard him talking about like Israel dragging us, I was like, wow, I could never have imagined, you know, to your point, let's actually play a Fox news clip because just rest assured Fox news has been embarrassingly slavishly pro-war building up to the war in the war. Now whitewashing everything that's going on. I mean, just absolute shameful cheerleaders. And this moment from Brit Hume, this is E7, guys, that I'm queuing up here, is particularly extraordinary because he's like, oh, I think the Democrats are caught in a bind because this war is so popular.

28:29Kat Abughazaleh:Meanwhile, look at literally every poll and you will see the way that people are completely disgusted with what is being done in their name. This is E7. Let's take a listen to that.

28:37Krystal Ball:The public reaction is likely to be favorable. And I think these Democrats are kind of trapped because they exist in a party whose membership overwhelmingly despises Donald Trump. It's been called Trump derangement syndrome, and there's something to that. And the result is that these Democrats, with rare exceptions, John Fetterman today, of course, was the one we just heard from, are opposed to this because they feel they must be, that they feel their job in life is to resist and oppose Donald Trump in every way, almost no matter what he does. So I think that accounts for the political reaction on the Democratic side here.

29:16Krystal Ball:Now, over time, those who are critical may feel vindicated if things start to go barely. But if they don't, they're going to be stuck with this.

29:25Kat Abughazaleh:Do you think the public is going to react very favorably to this?

29:28Scott Horton:Look, this is the same guy who sold the Iraq War in 2003. Why should we be so surprised? I literally used to watch this guy when I was a child in grade school doing the exact same stuff. Nothing's changed. Absolutely nothing has changed. And look, if anything, I want to give America credit because despite all this BS, they're still against the war. Imagine that. This is like a boomer trap, but the rest of the country is living in a totally different reality. I mean, I'm not just fluffing us, but yesterday was literally the biggest day in the history of our show. I think this is why. I am always, look, you know, you don't want to be too self-referential.

30:02Scott Horton:I'm like, it's very nice that the show is popular, but you'll watch cable news like I was yesterday waiting for Trump to speak. And I was like, oh, this is why, right? Because it's just Brett McGurk. Brett McGurk was on Stephen Colbert yesterday. Oh, my God. Are you serious? Yeah, so libs, give him up, all right? Colbert is bad. Sorry, unironically. Like, that was Stephen Colbert's special guest. If you don't know who that is, he's a former, he worked for multiple administrations. He's pro-war. He was driving the pro-genocide train under Biden. Exactly, pro-Israel, one of these typical blob politicians who's just been around the block.

30:39Scott Horton:One of the most failed politicians, one of the most failed U.S. policymakers probably in decades. But continues to fail up and kept around. Exactly. And he's the one who's on CNN all the time. Now he's on Stephen Colbert. I mean, this is the level of propaganda that we're all dealing with. It's craziness.

30:54Kat Abughazaleh:Let's put E6 up on the screen. This is Scott Jennings, who's, of course, the resident Republican over at CNN. So he's got two sirens here. He says, senior Trump administration officials tell me that credible intelligence indicated Iran planned preemptive missile strikes against U.S. military targets in the region and against civilian targets as well. Failure to act would have resulted in mass U.S. casualties. Yeah. So, you know, you know, this is really credible information when senior officials rather than like, you know, briefing Congress or like planning this with a credible media source, leak it to Scott Jennings so that he can tweet it out.

31:30Kat Abughazaleh:And sure enough, immediately you had everyone from Ted Cruz, you know, the military, the people themselves who went and briefed Congress saying, yeah, no, this is this is not true. There were no preemptive attacks. And now, of course, we've got Marco Rubio laying out this new tale about how, well, technically, there sort of were preemptive attacks. If Israel struck them first, which we thought they were going to strike them first, and that put us at risk. I guess that's their definition of, you know, preemptive, that we're preempting Israel, putting our troops in danger is the new story. Is CNN going to have this guy on again?

32:03Scott Horton:Of course. I mean, look at this.

32:04Kat Abughazaleh:I mean, this man lies all the time on their airwaves, and they just keep having him back, having him back, having him back. It's all theater.

32:10Scott Horton:It's all game, you know, to all of these people. If you get a story, like here's the thing. You're going to have any opinion that you want, literally any. I don't care. I'll never say that you shouldn't be allowed on the air. But that is literally bullshit whenever it comes. And it's laundered propaganda from the government. Does CNN have any standards to allow this up on their air? Because he is doing this under their auspices, repeating these types of talking points. And again, it's not an opinion. This is a literal fact that he's trying to presuppose onto the minds of the American public, which is a complete lie.

32:43Scott Horton:I can tell you. A complete lie.

32:45Kat Abughazaleh:If someone like came on our program and just like routinely, like we would not have back someone on the air who's just trying to lie to our audience all the time.

32:53Scott Horton:What is the purpose of that? Like it's not a game. It's not fun.

32:56Kat Abughazaleh:Yeah, they like the, you know, they like the fights. They like the debates. They like that circus. And so.

33:02Scott Horton:We'll fight and debate if we think there's a purpose to it, but this is literally a purpose for the actual supposed entertainment value. But this is the ultimate reduction of the mainstream media where even war and peace lies, where lives are at stake. The lives of American service members, Iranians, Israelis, Americans are living in the entire Gulf. Even that is reduced to entertainment. This is why I hate these people so, so much. By the way, speaking of hate, Van Jones, Mr. Reasonable. Here's Mr. Reasonable, Van Jones, singing the praises of Reza Pahlavi, the failed son, who will be the next monarch of Iran.

33:44Scott Horton:Take a listen.

33:45Krystal Ball:Recently, you saw millions of people come out of their homes protesting, demanding a new regime. They were chanting the name of Reza Pahlavi. Who is Reza Pahlavi? He is actually the son of someone who's known as the Shah of Iran. He doesn't want to come home as a ruler like his father. He wants to come home as a healer. He wants to come home as what's called a transitional figure to give the people of Iran a fair chance to come up with a new government for themselves. That is based not on theocracy like they have right now or a monarchy like they had under his father, but a true democracy. But why should you care about Reza Pahlavi?

34:30Krystal Ball:If Iran were suddenly to be ruled by someone who believes in democracy, believes in rule of law, believes in women's rights, believes in fairness to everyone, suddenly the entire region of the Middle East changes overnight. And the Iranian people get a chance to step forward as partners to the world again.

34:51Scott Horton:Yeah, this is what counts now for good analysis. They were chanting his name. Maybe some people were. Maybe a few Mossad people in the crowd were, for sure. This guy has no support out of Los Angeles and here in Georgetown and Potomac, Maryland, where he was.

35:07Kat Abughazaleh:Didn't even Trump say something about him? Yeah, even he was like,

35:09Scott Horton:yeah, he doesn't have that much support, except, you know, it's true. That's true. And then that lady with the Afro who's on TV. That's it. Those are the only people, right? It's ridiculous. And this is like, honestly, Ahmed Chalabi had more of a chance of leading Iraq than this guy does of leading Iran. A democratic transition. I mean, you know, this guy has not even said one word about any of the people he supposedly wants to lead who are dead. Not one word. So he's gonna lead them? Oh yeah, okay. I'm sure that's gonna work out. One thing that really endears leaders

35:40Kat Abughazaleh:to their potential subjects is when they cheer for their country to get bombed and their people to get killed and don't even express regret about it when it happens. That's something that I find really endears a potential leader to their people. And yeah, I mean, you know, and you love the propaganda. Like he fails to mention how the Shah came into power and why it was a monarchy. The fact that we overthrew their actual democratically elected leader, Mossadegh, and installed the Shans to the Shah. So, I mean, there is no legitimacy here whatsoever. And, you know, apparently even the Trump regime knows that.

36:15Kat Abughazaleh:But somehow Van Jones, who used to somehow be a Maoist, I mean, this man's transition to whatever this is, is just crazy, total seller. at this point.

36:23Scott Horton:And yeah, well, yeah, you can still get, take a little something called Bezos prize. Google Bezos. What do you get? A hundred million. Yeah. Okay. Interesting.

36:32Trita Parsi:This is Ashley Akinetti from the Ben and Ashley. I almost say this podcast. I Veeam is built for losing weight and moving forward. I Veeam is built for feeling your best and seeing real results. I Veeam is a medical weight loss program built for you. Their approach is individualized, virtual, integrative medicine. 99.2 % of patients who've completed the IVIM weight loss protocol achieved meaningful change, dropping an average of 45 pounds. IVIM, built for your wellness journey. IVIM, built for real life. When you sign up right now, you can get a one month free trial. Start your personalized plan in minutes by visiting IVIMHealth.com.

37:20Trita Parsi:That is IVIMHealth.com. Subscription required, medication, labs, and supplements not included. Results based on patients who completed the full IV protocol over 68 weeks. Individual results may vary. Not all patients are eligible. Prescription medication may carry risks and should be used only as directed by your provider.

37:43Krystal Ball:CBS Tonight is NCIS Night. New episodes of NCIS, NCIS Origins, and NCIS Sydney. Possible abduction of the Marines. We need to move. Anybody who's a potential target? We're going to do what we do, and we're going to figure out answers. Whatever they're planning, it's going down here.

38:00Scott Horton:NCIS!

38:01Krystal Ball:NCIS Night is all new. It's a night you've never seen. Everything you have, everything you want. CBS Tonight, starting at 8, 7 Central and streaming on Paramount+.

38:12Saagar Enjeti:How is TD making banking more human with less bank talk and more real talk? Less, your call is important to us, and more, how can we help? It's getting more of what you want and less of what you don't. That's how TD is making banking more human.

38:29Kat Abughazaleh:All right, guys, so this morning we are talking to Illinois congressional candidate for the 9th Congressional District, Kat Abogazela. She is running in a Democratic primary right now, and we wanted to talk to her specifically about foreign policy. Kat, welcome. Great to see you. Great to see you, too. Yeah, of course. So just to give people a little bit of sort of context and backstory here, Ryan was able to get his hands on an email that had been sent from a campaign advisor to you, who I understand is no longer with the team, that represented a number of your views that people had questions about because they found some of those views relatively surprising.

39:01Kat Abughazaleh:So we figured rather than trying to parse secondhand from an advisor who's no longer with the team anymore, we would just speak to you directly about these things. So glad to have you today. Thanks so much. Yeah, of course. So I actually wanted to start with an issue that wasn't in that letter. We'll get to the letter in a minute, but that is top of mind for people, which is the Iran war. So the first question is just, you know, what do you think about the Iran war? Do you support or oppose it and why?

39:24Saagar Enjeti:I absolutely oppose it. This was completely unprovoked. And as we saw in reporting this morning, Pete Hexeth is trying to paint this is a Christian war with one commander even telling his squad that this is to bring Jesus back through the Armageddon. This is a violation of international law. It's disgusting. And it's on Congress to pass a war powers resolution. This is also another impeachable offense for Trump. Absolutely oppose it. And I'm just couldn't be more disgusted.

39:56Krystal Ball:So Kat, let's go through some of the email to get your sense on where you agreed with Ben Murmel, the national security advisor, and where you disagreed with him. But first of all, is it true that he's no longer with the campaign? And was it this email? Was it something else? Like, if he's no longer with the campaign, what was the decision there?

40:21Saagar Enjeti:Yeah, let's start with Ben. So Ben was helping us write some policy on everything from animal rights to our free and sovereign Palestine page. He actually offered to resign the second the story broke because we have two weeks till election day and he didn't want the story to be about him. He wanted to support the campaign and it was a mutual decision, mainly because this was communication that was not passed by the campaign. It was not approved by the campaign. I would not have used such aggressive language. And there were some characterizations in there that I actively disagree with. But I also take umbrage with some of the characterizations I've seen of Ben.

40:57Saagar Enjeti:And I do want to clear this up right now. First off, I have seen people try to paint him as anti-Palestine. And that couldn't be further from the truth. Ben actually grew up in an Orthodox Jewish family and has lost many of his personal relationships, his family, his friends, his community for standing up for Palestinian dignity. He and I have spent hours articulating our right to return policy, which, of course, is very personal to myself and my family because, you know, we're Palestinian. He has consistently actually when he was at the GW encampment, I was also at the GW encampment. He was characterized as attending a pro-Israel counter protest there.

41:36Saagar Enjeti:Both the encampment and the counter protesters were extremely close together. I know he spoke to some of the hostages family, but I think that it's very disingenuous and also unfair to characterize him as anti-Palestine, considering what he has risked in his own personal life to stand up for Palestinian human rights. The main issue for his departure is the lack of communication with the campaign. We also were made aware of him inviting HSI, which is a part of ICE, to speak to a group that he was in. I very much disagree with that. I know that his perspective at that time was like, well, it's not like the bad part of ICE.

42:12Saagar Enjeti:It's an investigation wing. And I think that he now realizes that ICE has been bad since it's been created. And hopefully he wouldn't make that decision again. But I do have a problem with it.

42:23Kat Abughazaleh:Gotcha. So let's let's dig into the letter then a little bit. You said you disagreed with some of the framing or some of the language in the letter. Could you just be a little bit specific about that? And we can just put as an example, put G1 up on the screen as an example of some of the language in the letter. It described you as firmly an interventionist. And it also said you won't stop until Russia is made to pay for its crimes, among other policy characterizations. But what was some of the language in there that you felt was not reflective of the views that you hold?

42:55Saagar Enjeti:Well, those two quotes specifically are probably where I'd start. won't stop until Russia is made to pay for its crimes seems vague and aggressive, but firmly an interventionist I would very much disagree with. First off, I would not describe myself, and I've never described myself, as an interventionist when it comes to Ukraine and when it comes to anywhere in the world, including the United States' own actions. I am anti-war of aggression, anti-invasion, anti-crimes against humanity. And I think one thing that email didn't capture is how we need to exhaust all diplomatic, options for humane foreign policy and that any sort of military aid would be an absolute last resort.

43:35Saagar Enjeti:Also not captured there is talking about how paying for arms to Ukraine to protect itself from invasion should be paid for through seizing Russian oligarch assets, which has been a proposed solution in countries in Europe and is one I believe that we should act here. But what I really want to lead with is humane foreign policy. I'm endorsed by Peace Action, which is the world's largest grassroots peace network. I firmly believe that in my ideal United States, we are leading with public diplomacy. We are ensuring the reinstitution and also expansion of USAID and issuing reparations to the global South, especially in the focus of infrastructure and renewable energy.

44:17Saagar Enjeti:These are things that I think we should be focusing on. And deterrence is its own subject, But I do not describe myself as an interventionist.

44:26Krystal Ball:The two main things that people picked up on here were the Russia-Ukraine policy and then kind of China-Taiwan. So, I mean, let's do Russia-Ukraine first. So rather than get into what the email says is your policy, tell us what your policy is. Do you believe that, as the memo says, that the U.S. should arm Ukraine until basically every square foot of Ukrainian land is taken back from Russia? How do you see this ending?

45:00Saagar Enjeti:Yeah, I mean, I want to be realistic here. I'm not sure that there is a world right now where Ukraine gets every square foot of land that Russia has illegally seized. But there is a way that we can get Ukraine to a position where they have equal footing or an advantage at the bargaining table. I mean, part of the reason that this has been so costly for both states and for every state that is siding with either one is that there wasn't firm enough policy to demonstrate that this would be a costly affair, both in human life and in dollars. So the effort of arming Ukraine needs to be rooted in the idea of getting to a negotiating table where they are able to fight for their own self-determination and then also politically recognizing illegally seized land as still part of Ukraine.

45:47Kat Abughazaleh:So one specific question there, early in the war, there's reports that Ukraine and Russia were actually pretty close to a deal. And that deal would have involved Russia taking some land, Crimea, probably parts of eastern Ukraine. and the U.S. and the U.K. intervened to stop that diplomacy and to continue the war. So do you think that was the right move for the U.S. to intervene at that point and continue arming Ukraine and sort of block that potential diplomatic solution? Do you think that was the right decision or do you think that that was the wrong call at that point?

46:21Saagar Enjeti:I mean, personally, I think that historically appeasement has not been shown to be an effective solution to invasion. But I also firmly like when it comes to foreign policy, my leading principle is the idea of self-determination. And I think in that moment, it should have been up to the people of Ukraine to decide where they wanted to reach a peace deal. But once again, that's leading in self-determination. I'm not sure the exact call I would have made in that moment, because frankly, I'm not under bombings right now. And it's much different when you are in that position. I don't think it should be the United States and any other country's role to force any country to decide what decision to make in its own self-determination.

47:06Krystal Ball:So the war has lasted longer than World War I at this point. It has created a generational crisis of demography for Ukraine. I'm sure you've seen the, if you watch, There are countless videos going around of basically, you know, gangs of Ukrainian government officials like snatching fairly elderly people off the street, you know, pushing them into vans, driving them to the front. A lot of Ukrainian men have left for other parts of have left for other parts of Europe. If it's that difficult for the Ukrainian government to force its own people to go to the front lines and die in this war, why do we believe that we should then continue pushing them?

47:58Krystal Ball:Doesn't that say something about their lack of interest in pursuing this war if they have to be forced at gunpoint to go die for this? And so at what Russia also has suffered many tens of thousands, probably perhaps hundreds of thousands of casualties. Why does at what at what point. Does it become a cost that is like acceptable to the United States? What you said, you want to you want them to bear a cost so that they don't do it again. Haven't they borne that cost at this point or what would the cost be? I'm sorry.

48:31Saagar Enjeti:I don't know what I said when I said that I was mentioning that this war has been costly. And that's, I think, the aspect of everything that you said shows that war is hell. I think it should be up to the Ukrainian people and whether it is a referendum or whether it is negotiating from their leadership to decide what deal they want to make to end this war. but once again invasion is not okay it's not okay when the united states does it

48:59Krystal Ball:how would the ukrainian people express that sense of self-determination there aren't elections and when they are asked to go to the front lines they resist that's part of the problem ensuring

49:10Saagar Enjeti:that there are ways to uh have like i know that war is difficult but i do think that there is uh more role for democracy to play here but at the same time i just need to stress that invasion and wars of aggression are not okay. It's not okay when the U.S. does it. It's not okay when Russia does it. And appeasement historically is not the answer or the instant salve to an invader as we'd like to hope it would be.

49:40Kat Abughazaleh:And then how do you balance this? And this will tie into your Taiwan policy. How do you balance those principles of, you know, natural self-determination and opposing wars of aggression with concern that, for example, and you can tell me whether this is your policy or not, by providing long-range weaponry to Ukraine, allowing them to strike within Russia, increasing involvement in what is clearly like a proxy war with the U.S. directly involved on the side of Ukraine, that you're courting this direct engagement between two nuclear powers, which obviously in the nuclear age, we have to take extraordinarily seriously.

50:18Kat Abughazaleh:So how do you balance those principles that you hold with a concern about an escalatory spiral that could lead into chaos and disaster?

50:31Saagar Enjeti:Yeah, I think that this is one of those issues that in our modern diplomatic age, it's like there's no black and white. But I think the main thing here is that Putin doesn't just want to stop with part of Ukraine. That is not his plan. He will continue to take more and more. We saw this after 2014, the fact that he invaded Ukraine once again in a war of aggression shows that his goal is not just for one piece of the country or even just that country. We risk even greater conflict, not just between as like a proxy war, which I, in my own values, I don't want to see or I would not want to support Ukraine in that respect, but in a way of self-determination.

51:19Saagar Enjeti:But it would be in that case, you would have even more countries that are directly drawn into this conflict, raising the stakes of possible nuclear war or possible conflict between superpowers. I also think, you know, for me, nuclear disarmament is a huge priority and something that I would want to champion in Congress, especially in a post-Trump world.

51:41Krystal Ball:On the question of 2014, do you think the U.S. played a role in instigating by pushing NATO closer and closer, the support for, active support for the Maidan uprising? What role and response? Because I think that goes to the question of American intervention and its virtues.

52:02Saagar Enjeti:I totally get what you're saying, Ryan, but personally, I think the point is moot once you're invading another country, once you are violating that sovereignty.

52:12Saagar Enjeti:There is no equivocating on whether that's okay or not. no matter what the United States or any other country is doing. Invasion is a line that we need to draw.

52:23Kat Abughazaleh:All right, let's talk then a little bit about your policy on Taiwan. And again, rather than quoting from the letter from the advisor, I'll just let you have the floor here of how you think that the U.S. should approach Taiwan and China.

52:38Saagar Enjeti:I really appreciate that, Crystal, genuinely. And I also want to stress for anyone, and not just you, Ryan, if you want to reach out to us, I don't use Twitter anymore. The best way to contact us is through our press accounts or any of the other social media accounts that we're on. So for comment, would really appreciate that in the future. Regarding Taiwan, though, look, the Republicans want to use China as some boogeyman, and I don't think it has to be that way. You know, we are in a globalized world. I am not an isolationist, but I want us to get to a point where China can be a partner with us in trade and innovation.

53:12Saagar Enjeti:I also have to balance that with the commitment that I have to self-determination and to promises that we have made in the past. Regarding Taiwan, I think one thing this email didn't get clear was the fact that any sort of military aid to Taiwan is an absolute last resort, not just after diplomatic options have been exhausted, but after we exhaust the diplomatic options after that. We need to be reinvesting in diplomacy between Taiwan and China, between Taiwan and the U.S. and the U.S. and China. Additionally, we need to be politically adhering to the one China policy. If the Taiwanese people pass a referendum saying they want reunification with China, I'm absolutely supportive of that.

53:53Saagar Enjeti:That is their choice. But once again, invasion is where we draw the line. Even then, I don't support boots on the ground in Taiwan. I support specifically in a defensive stance for Taiwan to be able to protect itself from invasion to ensure that there is, you know, a cost by trying to invade this country. But I also want to stress here that military aid should be conditional. And I don't care if it's Taiwan or Mexico. If we are providing military aid to a country, we need to ensure it's conditional, that, you know, crimes against humanity are not being... systematically committed using our weapons paid for by our tax dollars.

54:35Saagar Enjeti:Additionally, I also want to stress that military aid is expensive. I also think we should be slashing the Pentagon's budget and that we should be closing many of our military bases overseas. This is a massive cost, and we also need to be investigating companies and contractors in the military-industrial complex that have essentially robbed the taxpayers of our money for their own profit.

54:56Krystal Ball:So the current policy towards Taiwan is known as, as you've talked about, strategic ambiguity, where you don't, the U.S. won't say whether or not they're going to come in and actively defend in the case of a Chinese assault on Taiwan. Do you believe, as the memo says, and I believe you've said elsewhere, but just get it directly from you, do you believe that policy should be altered? And how? Here's the thing.

55:24Saagar Enjeti:If we had a president who wasn't a complete madman, like a complete psychopath, I would say let's not even touch it. If we had a president AOC here who was able to balance these things at one time, I would say absolutely this is the policy to go with. But we don't have that. We have a guy who's waging a Christian war with Israel against Iran with zero provocation. we need to ensure that we are codifying major actions that we will need to take regardless of the president under this administration especially because no one the united states china any other country in the world has any idea what would happen if china does invade taiwan under this president it could be wiping your hands clean and saying i'm good he could try to nuke it We have no idea.

56:16Saagar Enjeti:By codifying a response, we can ensure that there is that deterrence for more diplomatic solutions, which once again is the main thing. The last thing I want is war with China. But Trump is a madman and we have no idea his response to anything on the foreign or domestic stage. This is why I even I mean, it's controversial to broach the subject at all, but why I did so.

56:42Krystal Ball:So just one quick follow-up. So just to make sure I understand what you're saying. So because Trump is a madman, you want to codify that the U.S. will definitely respond militarily if China moves on Taiwan.

56:56Saagar Enjeti:Will provide military aid to Taiwan if asked to defend itself from an invasion. That military aid, of course, being conditional.

57:03Krystal Ball:And aid means shipping weapons or aid means actively participating and assisting in the defense?

57:09Saagar Enjeti:I know in the past I have said aid in intercepting missiles at the beginning of an invasion. I think that is on the table, but we should not have U.S. troops deployed on Taiwanese soil.

57:20Trita Parsi:This is Ashley Iacanetti from the Ben and Ashley I, Almost Famous podcast. iVeam is built for losing weight and moving forward. iVeam is built for feeling your best and seeing real results. iVeam is a medical weight loss program built for you. Their approach is individualized, virtual, integrative medicine. 99.2 % of patients who've completed the IVIM weight loss protocol achieved meaningful change, dropping an average of 45 pounds. IVIM, built for your wellness journey. IVIM, built for real life. When you sign up right now, you can get a one-month free trial. Start your personalized plan in minutes by visiting IVIMHealth.com.

58:09Trita Parsi:That is IVIMHealth.com. Subscription required, medication, labs, and supplements not included. Results based on patients who completed the full IVIM protocol over 68 weeks. Individual results may vary. Not all patients are eligible. Prescription medication may carry risks and should be used only as directed by your provider.

58:32Krystal Ball:CBS Tonight is NCIS Night. New episodes of NCIS, NCIS Origins, and NCIS Sydney. Possible abduction of the Marines. We need to move. Anybody who's a potential target? We're going to do what we do, and we're going to figure out answers. Whatever they're planning, it's going down here.

58:49Scott Horton:NCIS!

58:50Krystal Ball:NCIS Night is all new. It's a night you've never seen. cbs tonight starting at 7 central and streaming on paramount plus how is td making banking more

59:03Saagar Enjeti:human with less bank talk and more real talk less your call is important to us and more how can we help it's getting more of what you want and less of what you don't that's how td's making banking

59:15Kat Abughazaleh:more human obviously the concern is that if you move away from strategic ambiguity which is meant I don't know what we do, to enforcing this hard line and saying, you know, we will respond, we will defund Taiwan, that that would, in fact, provoke a direct conflict with China. And again, gets to the, you know, the same concern about a direct conflict with Russia, obviously nuclear armed superpower, incredibly capable at this point in terms of their military and technology. So what gives you the confidence that drawing that harder line is not going to actually escalate the conflict with China.

59:56Saagar Enjeti:I mean, frankly, Biden did this in his last administration. He mentioned that we need to be questioning where we stand on strategic ambiguity. And the response that China had was some angry op-eds on the mainland, but did not spark a full invasion into Taiwan.

1:00:14Krystal Ball:So on a more kind of philosophical level to get to the heart of your in a foreign policy approach. You do have a very deep and intuitive understanding of the problems with the military industrial complex and also its willingness to like assist in a genocide in Gaza. I'm just curious, how did you develop this comfort with using U.S. military support intervention and U.S. sanctions around the world? Like one would expect, like, for somebody who has seen what the U.S. is capable of when it intervenes either through sanctions policy or militarily, you'd say, you know what, we just need to roll this back.

1:01:01Krystal Ball:So where does the comfort come from?

1:01:03Saagar Enjeti:I wouldn't describe it as comfort at all. I mean, my own family was expelled from Palestine in 1948. And there are still many of my family members that don't have full civil or legal rights that have been killed as a result of this genocide. It's not something that I take any comfort in. But I also think we need to be realistic in the right to self-determination, which I think is something that I hope you all understand. I'm very personally invested in and passionate about. But I want to do everything we possibly can to lead with humane foreign policy. Under Trump, these are safeguards against him and not knowing what his response would be.

1:01:49Saagar Enjeti:But I ideally would like to not have to use them at all. One of the, you know, I studied international affairs, actually focused on security policy. Like I really focused on atrocity, genocide and extremism in school. and one of my biggest passions, one of my favorite courses and one of the things that I've studied the most is the value of public diplomacy, of cultural exchange, of investing in infrastructure, of the need to have trade between all of these countries in the globalized world that we have now. That is what I want our foreign policy to be. I want to be rolling back military bases abroad.

1:02:24Saagar Enjeti:I want to be cutting the Pentagon's budget. We need to be investing it in housing, groceries, in healthcare here. We need not just a Marshall Plan, but a new, new deal for our federal government that includes mass employment, that includes building more housing, that focuses instead of bombs on actually helping folks here. But we also will have to deal with the fact that we are pariahs on the global stage. We need to recognize, I think one of the issues here when we're talking about this is I mean what I say. And that's not something you see a lot in politics, especially when it comes to military aid.

1:03:04Saagar Enjeti:I feel very passionate about sovereignty and I feel very passionate about human rights. And that is part of why I am running for Congress in the first place. I want to not just end the genocide in Gaza and in the West Bank, but also be working towards establishing Palestinian statehood and also ensuring that any solution there is negotiated by the people actually living there and not dictated by the United States. These are all principles that can, when it comes to military aid, when it comes to public diplomacy, when it comes to reparations for the global South, it can be difficult to hold them in, especially with the United States history of intervention and imperialism, to hold them together and to understand how they contradict and also understand how they're more complicated than we would like to portray them.

1:03:56Saagar Enjeti:But that is also part of the reason that I want to help elect more progressives across the country so we don't have representatives that are beholden to the military-industrial complex. And we can look at these issues with clear eyes and also express disagreements and try to find the best path forward.

1:04:11Kat Abughazaleh:It just seems that the two values are somewhat in conflict. The value of rolling back, you know, the bases overseas and checking the military industrial complex and reclaiming some of that funding so that instead of having austerity for social programs, we have austerity for the Pentagon, seems to be in conflict with the instinct to intervene in all of these border disputes. And one other thing that I'll put there too is, obviously, we talk about Ukraine and Taiwan a lot, because those are the places where the empire has the most interest and is interested in checking these geopolitical rivals in particular.

1:04:46Kat Abughazaleh:But there are dozens of border disputes around the world right now. So also, what is the limiting principle for where you would want the military engaged, where you would want us intervening potentially covertly? You know, how do you how do you reel that in if that's the underlying principle? First off, I don't support like covert CIA coups.

1:05:10Saagar Enjeti:And I think this is something that we also need to ensure that we are holding people accountable for, that we are investigating these types of interventions that we have made. These are things that I think we should be saying publicly and above board or at least discussing publicly and above board because that lack of transparency when it comes to any sort of intervention has been limited in the past. and when it comes to these two issues in particular not only have we made a commitment actually full stop we have made a commitment and I also want to stress that any sort of aid to these two states has to come with consent from those states you are absolutely right crystal of like these are geopolitical rivals but it also means that when they are doing an imperialism when they are invading another country, they aren't necessarily in the right just because they're not the United States.

1:06:06Saagar Enjeti:Yes, these are two very hot button topics that involve two of our biggest geopolitical rivals, but they're also two commitments that we have made. And when it comes to invasion, if we have made that commitment, we should absolutely stand by it with the consent of those countries and not putting our troops on the ground. But first off, exhausting every diplomatic option beforehand. Are there any models for intervention, either diplomatic or military,

1:06:36Krystal Ball:that you would uplift as like, this is how it should be done. And this was actually effective at producing self-determination in the country where it was brought to.

1:06:48Saagar Enjeti:I'm actually going to go a little bit aside from that question to one of my favorite examples of public diplomacy that when I first heard like the first half of this, I was like, I don't know about that. And then by the end of it was on board with, so bear with me here. My, one of my professors was a PAO in a Middle Eastern country, a public affairs office officer. And during Ramadan, this was, I believe in like 2014, early 2010s, they worked with a local film group to create a TV series about the realities of being an ISIS bride, of being a woman recruited to ISIS and the horror of, I think all of us can agree that women undergo when they are recruited by ISIS.

1:07:35Saagar Enjeti:It was largely paid for with a coalition of dollars, but also pushed by the American, by the American government. But it was, had complete control by the filmmakers who were local that filmed it, wrote it, distributed it, and it was aired during Ramadan. The next year, ISIS recruitment of women went down by like 75%. That is, I think, a, yes, it is a small example, but an example of actually beneficial U.S. involvement in diplomacy, but also actively working towards a goal. Of course, that is much smaller than providing military aid or trying to negotiate border disputes. But this is the type of public diplomacy and humane foreign policy that I think we should be leading with by putting it in the hands of the people that actually live there, of the leaders who are actually there, of addressing the issues that they actually want to address and not saying we are the cops that are dictating what you have to do, but instead asking, look, especially as we're going to have to make a lot of, we're going to have to be on like a 20 year apology tour after this presidency.

1:08:50Saagar Enjeti:And after, you know, the last hundred years of American foreign policy, um, of we have immense resources and these are actual issues on the ground. And if we are going to be involved in this globalized world, how do you want us to be involved.

1:09:09Kat Abughazaleh:And in terms of a military intervention or action, is there a model that, you know, that you would point to that is sort of reflective of the values that you support?

1:09:19Saagar Enjeti:I mean, unfortunately, the war that I can think that the United States was on the right of is World War II. And I can point to the fact that appeasement didn't work, but that working with and arming countries that did fight against invasion was successful, But it did have a massive toll, which is why we need to have a firmer commitment to international law, international laws that didn't exist until after that war, and ensuring that we are truly trying to follow those principles. Laws that, by the way, were created by both the United States and the Soviet Union. Um, but the truth is over the last hundred years, the only consistency we've really seen, uh, is across the board, uh, the effects of imperialism and the model for fascism on the global scale, uh, targeting visible minorities, queer people, educational institutions, uh, and trying to silo a population, uh, in its, within its borders while targeting another population.

1:10:22Saagar Enjeti:So we are kind of on uncharted territory here. And I think it's on us, not just as the United States, but as a planet to be committing to the values that we believe and trying something new.

1:10:34Krystal Ball:There's an argument. I'm curious. I'm sure you've seen it. I'm curious for your take on it. that kind of hawkish wing of the U.S. security establishment over learned the lesson of World War Two and and now tries to frame all diplomacy as appeasement, that any any diplomacy with somebody that you consider to be adversarial is by then definition appeasement and will lead to then worse things. So we actually have to you actually have to confront confrontation has to be the lead. What's your I'm sure you've heard that argument. What's your counter to it?

1:11:07Saagar Enjeti:I think it's a dumb argument, frankly. Like I said, you know, a lot of American politicians on both sides want to paint China as a boogeyman. And I think that we can be using deterrence not just as a way to stop an invasion of Taiwan, but also as a stopgap to build diplomatic relations between the U.S. and China. We live in a globalized world and we have to act like it. We have to be encouraging more trade relationships. We have to be encouraging investment in infrastructure and renewable energy. We have to be collaborating on innovation. And maybe that sounds Pollyanna-ish, but I don't care. I think that this is the future of our world.

1:11:47Saagar Enjeti:If we want to have any chance of surviving climate change, if we want to have any chance of not enduring a thermonuclear war, that collaboration and diplomacy is essential. and you'll have to do it with countries you like and countries you don't like. And I think that specific argument that you mentioned, especially by Warhawks, is frankly kind of idiotic.

1:12:10Kat Abughazaleh:I would just go back to the example of Ukraine because I think it illustrates some of the difficult choices here where very early on there was a diplomatic effort, and we know kind of the contours of what that deal would have looked like. And it is a much better deal than what would likely be on the table for Ukraine today. And it obviously comes four years before we've had this mass death and destruction and the loss effectively of an entire generation, if not two generations, of Ukrainian men and heavy battlefield losses. So, you know, how do you think about weighing and balancing the fact that there's no doubt, right, in a lot of ways it would have been an unjust outcome at that point in time because Russia would have taken some territory based on that invasion.

1:12:59Kat Abughazaleh:Nevertheless, it would be a superior outcome to what is likely to be achievable at this point.

1:13:05Saagar Enjeti:Once again, I think that in that instance, it should have been up to Ukraine and not pressured by other countries outside of Ukraine. This is an argument of sovereignty, in my opinion. And if that is what the country of Ukraine chooses to do and what they have negotiated, that should be their prerogative. And the United States is not Ukraine. I'm not sure if y 'all have heard this. We are not Ukraine. And it should be up to that country to be able to decide its future.

1:13:35Kat Abughazaleh:So AIPAC has apparently been coming after you, Kat. Ryan, maybe you should set this up because you know the details of who exactly this APAC-affiliated Super PAC Chicago Progressive Partnership is.

1:13:47Krystal Ball:Yeah, this seems like a new one. Originally, they were doing – well, they had two in there, Affordable Chicago Now. Ironically, APAC biting Mom Donnie's kind of affordability message. And then they had one, Elect Chicago Women.

1:14:01Saagar Enjeti:Now they call it ECW because it's already so toxic.

1:14:04Krystal Ball:so immediately their their fake pack had took on a level of toxicity that that they had to they were docs yeah so they're coming after you for positions you held in high school am i yeah so are we are we reading that right yeah hold on let me describe this ad to y 'all

1:14:22Saagar Enjeti:um so i uh grew up like reagan republican because my mom was a white texan and my dad was like yeah assimilation is great. And so when I was about 15, I started questioning whether Ronald Reagan was right about everything. He was wrong pretty much about everything. And Trump had just announced his presidency around then. And so I was like, maybe Marco Rubio is the answer, which anyways, I wrote an op-ed in my high school paper, which is now defunct, by the way, I got it shut down for writing a story on students cheating and the alumni association didn't like that. But they quoted this paper twice in an ad to try to paint me as a secret Republican, literally my high school paper.

1:15:09Saagar Enjeti:Additionally, they have, they used AI to like give me Mar-a-Lago face on a pin next to Marco Rubio's face. It's really incredible stuff. It also, the entire thing is like, who is Kat Abagazale? We don't know. As if there aren't thousands of pages of my own reporting and federal indictments to let people know, but genuinely made me laugh out loud.

1:15:34Krystal Ball:So you've been on a journey since then. Yeah. So can you talk about how you wound up where you are now? Because I think we have G6 here. I think along the way on this journey, you were a bit enamored of Pete Buttigieg.

1:15:50Kat Abughazaleh:You had high hopes for Pete.

1:15:52Krystal Ball:High hopes for Pete. I had high hopes for Pete.

1:15:54Kat Abughazaleh:For Pete, yeah.

1:15:54Krystal Ball:So what was it about the Buttigieg campaign that like attracted you then? And if like, is that where you are politically now? Or would you if today's cat was back in the 2020 presidential election, would you support a different?

1:16:10Saagar Enjeti:I would be supporting Bernie Sanders. So I so I grew up in this like, you know, fiscally conservative household. And then we moved and where we moved to was much less segregated by income than where I had originally grown up. So I was about 15. And one of my friends who absolutely brilliant, so much smarter and more talented than me, couldn't go to college. She wanted to be a doctor and she couldn't go to college. She still hasn't because she had to help take care of her family. and it kind of it was like that puncture that I needed to break this uh conservative sphere I was in where I was like but you did everything right you did the bootstraps you got the scholarship like what do you mean you can't go to college so that was when I started questioning things uh by the end of the 2016 election I was canvassing for Hillary did some voter registration drives and I was like I'm a democrat now uh and then throughout college I started to go more and more to the left specifically focusing on atrocity genocide and extremism because there was also this idea, my parents also came on this journey with me of a lot of our values didn't align with this party that we said we were a part of.

1:17:18Saagar Enjeti:Like at no point during my childhood did I feel like I couldn't do something just because I was a woman. I was very passionate about Palestinian sovereignty. Uh, since I was a little kid, I actually got put, um, in, I couldn't go to recess one day because I corrected my fifth grade teacher on settlements. Uh, but in college, I just started kind of, I was coming to this idea of like, well, you know, we need the guy that will appeal to everyone. And I thought I actually wrote a paper in my senior year where I was like, Pete Buttigieg is the Vodkastota candidate. Like you can just get it at a bar and it's fine.

1:17:50Saagar Enjeti:But yeah, by 2020, I graduated. I had gone to school to either become a foreign service officer or to work for like a legacy media outlet. And I graduated into May 2020. And I was very disenchanted with both our government and legacy media, which is why I started looking for jobs that align more with my values. By the time of January 2020, I was very much in Bernie's camp. And I wish that in 2016, I could have been a part of that too, even though I was 16, 17 years old. But really covering the far right and seeing how ineffective Democrats have been in addressing the threat of the far right has been essential in shaping my worldview.

1:18:32Saagar Enjeti:Like we told them about January 6th before it happened. We told them about where the DEICRT anti-trans panic would lead. We told them about how attacking encampments under the guise of protecting students from anti-Semitism was actually aligning with people spreading the Great Replacement Theory. And they didn't listen. And so that's why I decided to run for Congress, because I wanted someone in Congress who understood the far right. And I do.

1:18:54Kat Abughazaleh:And lastly, Kat, just tell people, you know, when is the primary? How's the campaign going? And how can they support you if they're so inclined down the stretch?

1:19:02Saagar Enjeti:If I've redeemed myself at all in this interview, you can find our website, catforillinois.com. That's cat with a K. Our primary day is March 17th. Early voting has already started all over the district. The ninth district of Illinois goes from uptown Chicago up to Evanston, West Suskogia, and then all the way to Crystal Lake in Algonquin. It is gerrymandered to hell. It looks like Maryland on Ozepic, but we would love your help. So you can join our Discord, discord.gg slash catforillinois. you can phone bank from anywhere you can doorknock if you're local we could really use your help uh of the three viable candidates in this race i am the only one who has not met with or submitted a position paper to apac i was the first one to call for impeachment uh and we are the only campaign in this entire race of 16 candidates that is funded by majority small dollar donations well we really

1:19:52Kat Abughazaleh:appreciate you um doing the interview and just clarifying where you stand i don't think you needed redemption, but people just want to know, okay, you know, what are your views? And, and no, absolutely.

1:20:01Saagar Enjeti:I mean, like, I'm joking when I say that, but like the main thing is, is like, look, we can disagree on these, but I always want to be clear about where I stand. Uh, I am, since I was a little kid, my belief has been, you have to stick to your morals, even to your own detriment, or even if it, you know, pisses someone off. So this is where I stand. And I hope that we were able to clarify this.

1:20:19Kat Abughazaleh:Appreciate that. Kat, thank you so much. Good luck. Great to see you.

1:20:22Saagar Enjeti:Thanks so much, guys.

1:20:23Scott Horton:Thank you guys so much for watching. We appreciate it. As a reminder, we do have our free month trial going on. Let's put that up there on the screen. BreakingPoints.com promo code is BP Free 26 and you can try our premium service just for one free month and see if you can use it. You can cancel any time if you don't want to. We deeply appreciate all of the millions of new people who are watching the show. It really is incredible to see and we appreciate you all very, very much. Sorry about some of the programming stuff. Lots going on today. So we had to drop a few segments.

1:20:53Kat Abughazaleh:Yeah, but we'll pick them up. Don't worry. We're going to get to that hypocrisy. That one is not going to, we're not going to lose sight of that. One last point of personal privilege. Happy birthday to my daughter, Ella, who is turning 18 today, which I'm in denial about. I think she's in denial about too, but love her very much and excited about the young woman she has become.

1:21:12Scott Horton:Happy birthday, Ella. As a girl dad, I'm already dreading 18. You can stay this size forever. All right. Thank you guys so much for watching. We will see you all on Thursday. Great show for everybody tomorrow, though.

1:21:48Trita Parsi:built for feeling your best and seeing real results. iVeam is a medical weight loss program built for you. Their approach is individualized, virtual, integrative medicine. 99.2 % of patients who've completed the iVeam weight loss protocol achieved meaningful change, dropping an average of 45 pounds. iVeam, built for your wellness journey. iVeam, built for real life. When you sign up right now, you can get a one month free trial. Start your personalized plan in minutes by visiting IVIMHealth.com. That is IVIMHealth.com. Subscription required, medication, labs, and supplements not included. Results based on patients who completed the full IV protocol over 68 weeks.

1:22:41Trita Parsi:Individual results may vary. Not all patients are eligible. Prescription medication may carry risks and should be used only as directed by your provider.

1:22:50Krystal Ball:CBS Tonight is NCIS Night. New episodes of NCIS, NCIS Origins, and NCIS Sydney. Possible abduction of the Marines. We need to move. Anybody who's a potential target? We're going to do what we do, and we're going to figure out answers. Whatever they're planning, it's going down here.

1:23:07Scott Horton:NCIS!

1:23:08Krystal Ball:NCIS Night is all new. It's a night you've never seen. Everything you have, everything you have. CBS Tonight, starting at 8, 7 Central and streaming on Paramount+.

1:23:20Saagar Enjeti:How is TD making banking more human? Easy. With less bank talk and more real talk. Less, your call is important to us. And more, how can we help? Less confusion and more clarity. It's things like tapping your phone to use your TD card and getting your paycheck two business days early. It's getting more of what you want and less of what you don't. That's how TDs making banking more human.

1:23:47Krystal Ball:Are we human?

1:23:49Saagar Enjeti:This is an iHeart Podcast.

1:23:52Trita Parsi:Guaranteed human.