175. TRUMP CALLS FOR IRAN CEASEFIRE – WILL IT HOLD?

22:23He's totally unhinged. And we're only at the end of year one. Now, is it age? Is it, you know, his paranoia? Is it his vindictiveness after everything that he has gone through? But I don't think that, you know, for all the criticisms that we had over, you know, kind of President Biden's mental capacity, I think it's very valid to look at Trump right now. He acts unhinged. And, you know, the United States is a great world power. We have enormous military, political, economic clout. And I think this is scary for a lot of our allies. He's not reliable. And the question they ask is, what do we do?

22:58Anthony Scaramucci:Right. Mark, can I ask you about Iran a bit while we have you? And I want to try to understand, because you and I have spoken about this over the last few weeks, what intelligence questions you have about Iran? How much do we know? How much don't we know? And how much more do we need to know to ensure that we end this whole awful enterprise with something that is better and safer for the region and for the rest of the world? What are the questions we need to be asking? And so that's how you judge the CIA, by the way, is that if we can answer a certain set of questions. And one of the things, Katya, you and I talked about was, you know, we became very good in the global war on terrorism at manhunting.

23:47It's something I did. It's the find, fix, and finish missions. It's finding Osama bin Laden and removing him from the battlefield. And the CIA was great at this tactical intelligence. I remember sitting down with Bill Burns, the former CIA director, before he took office. He was my ambassador in Jordan. So I got to see him. I retired, but I went to see him at Langley. And he said, what do I need to do? And I said, you know, we're really good at killing people. We're not really good at answering key questions from policymakers on strategic intelligence against hard targets. So it would be right now in Iran is, you know, what is the status, of course, of the Iranian leadership?

24:20Who, you know, who has the power?

24:21Anthony Scaramucci:Yeah, it's weird that after, it seems to me weird that we still don't know that, right? And we've had speculation that he's injured. We haven't actually seen him in public. Is he actually still alive? Great question. You know, and that means we have to have a penetration of senior members of the Iranian kind of inner circle. So, and that's hard to do. Now, again, can we find, fix, and finish Iranian leadership, put a Hellfire missile somewhere or a TLAM missile? Sure. But I'm talking about recruiting an agent who's going to answer those questions. Number two is what are Iran's plans and intentions right now in the negotiations?

24:55So for example, the CIA would need to steal the secret of the paper that the Iranian foreign ministry, the IRGC, whoever it is, is going to write as they go into discussions in Islamabad, which apparently is taking place in several days. We need to have that information for our policy. I don't know if we can do that. And I say that because we have been so reactive into so much that has happened. And so either the president's daily brief is as really good intelligence in it and everybody's ignoring it, or we're actually not able to answer those questions. Those questions are hard, but we've been so disjointed and incoherent on our policy on things that we should have, like the idea that the Strait of Hormuz would be closed by the Iranians.

25:38I mean, that is basic 101 stuff. I don't know.

25:41Anthony Scaramucci:Yeah. And you've said to me in the past, Mark, that it's pretty clear that Trump was given this intelligence. He would have been given the intelligence from the intelligence community that this is the risks of the Strait of Hormuz being shut. This is the risk of allies being retaliated against. I mean, they know this stuff. They would have presented that to him and maybe he chose to not listen to them. Or they didn't do it or they were scared to do it. That New York Times piece, going back to that critical piece is you saw a little bit of dissent in some of the national security team, but not all that much.

26:17The chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Dan Kane, he gets the PDB. So does Marco Rubio. So does Pete Hegseth.

26:22Anthony Scaramucci:So for those of you that don't know, the PDB is Anthony Scaramucci. Oh, sorry. Go ahead. No, it's Presidential Daily Brief. You know, I got it on an iPad. You know, I read it. But, you know, those guys, Mark, they wanted to go on the record to say Rubio said it was bullshit. Yeah. They went on the record. Ratcliffe said it was farcical. Right. Listen, you know, you know, I think the president is very unwell. Yeah. And I think the president needs to be removed from office like tonight. tonight. And I think that this is a crisis for the country now because we're so polarized in a different time, in a different era, with different people in the Congress and different people in the cabinet.

27:12They'd be looking at each other and saying, okay, he has to be removed. You could take the high crimes and misdemeanors, okay, or you could go with the 25th Amendment route. Of course, he would contest it. I just want to point out to viewers and listeners outside the United States if the president were to contest the 25th Amendment, usually like if he was incapacitated and he can't contest it, and then they remove him once they get the vote of the cabinet and the vice president has to initiate it. But let's say that he contests it, which he likely would. You would need, and I want to repeat this, you need a two-thirds vote in the House and you need a two-thirds vote in the Senate.

27:52That's a higher standard than the impeachment because it's just 51 % in the House. and then two thirds in the Senate. But the president needs to be removed from office. I am an American. I love my country. I'm a patriotic American. An objective reading of this, if we were on a board of directors of the business known as the United States, and we looked at a CEO acting with this level of erratic behavior. Right. Okay. Would you vote for that removal, Mark? Absolutely. And one of the things that I always wonder is, you know, so, you know, obviously, and Anthony, you saw this too, you know, one gets into positions of power.

28:39And I think the first thing that one should do is have a resignation letter in your desk. you know you can't be afraid of losing your cabinet position or your position somewhere senior in government and it would it would you know it would there's no way these individuals behind the scenes think Trump is sane now because he's not because you just like those of us in Washington and New York too you watch him kind of obsessively because he is actually you know he's out there a lot he's definitely not well and he's not making sense and everything is an incoherent ramble if you see him in that two-hour press conference the other day was yesterday which started off with him talking with a Easter bunny rabbit.

29:16And he's talking about war with Iran and then meshes into two hours of just, he was all over the place. I'm going to obliterate Iran. I love the Iranian people. I mean, it's crazy stuff. And so, but the question you have to, or I would think that when you go into a senior position is you have to be able to lose that position for the betterment of the country. Now, I don't think anybody has that kind of moral character and fortitude because people get absolutely, you know, with power. And so they're not going to want to lose. Marco Rubio is a perfect example. Marco Rubio, who I briefed, Katie, you and I have talked about this on set.

29:50I mean, I briefed him as a senior intelligence officer. He was great on foreign policy. He was incredibly promoted.

29:56Anthony Scaramucci:He was one of the best people in the Senate. He looks like an alien right now. He's so important. supported NATO, supported Ukraine. Okay, Mark, we, um, we're going to wrap it up there. Thank you for joining us this evening. It was great to get your insight, particularly all of your insight from your Mossad body. You're looking good. Everything looks good about you, Mark, but the Red Sox sign behind you. The Red Sox sign not looking good to us New Yorkers. We were all looking like we're in good shape. There's a connective tissue that we have over for somebody we all know who's, you know, perhaps, you know, would like a shout out.

30:33But that's for you guys. All right. I'm going to give a shout out. I'm going to give a shout out. I'm going to give a shout out.

30:38Anthony Scaramucci:The guy who keeps us looking as, you know, relatively healthy. I'm giving a shout out to Ray Solomon. But Ray Solomon is guguts. Okay. Or as the Greeks would say, trelos. Go ahead. Look it up. Trelos. Trelos. He played my triple ball the other day. So I got to go down to Florida and play. I say that with great affection. He's an awesome. Mark, thanks very much. He's an awesome human being, Ray Solomon.

31:03Anthony Scaramucci:One of the things that I've been texting you about that has surprised me, and before we get to Mike Froman, who we're going to bring in, who's the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, in a few minutes, we're going to bring him into the program. I just want to talk a little bit of domestic politics with you, Anthony. One of the things that surprised me today, this is the president of the United States saying that he's going to end a civilization. How many Republican senators came out and said, the president cannot talk like that. That is threatening genocide on another country. Whether or not he's doing this for leverage is frankly irrelevant.

31:37Anthony Scaramucci:The president cannot threaten to end a civilization. How many Republican senators said - What is the number, Katie? Three, two, Tillis? By my count, it's actually only two, but it may be three. Tillis may have joined them. Ron Johnson, Lisa Mikowski, who actually had to think about it for about 800, nine hours. And I don't know if Tillis has done it as well. Maybe he has. You've had a couple of Republican congressmen, but basically crickets from the Republican Party. And at what point, what do they need to be able to say this? Okay, Mr. President, we understand you need leverage. We understand that's the way you operate.

32:14Anthony Scaramucci:And the White House is already trying to spin this ceasefire as this is the genius of the 5D chess that the president plays so well that no one else can play, but he threatened the whole civilization with death. Listen, listen, it's embarrassing. It's intolerable. He has to be removed from office. He's not going to be removed from office. He won't be removed from office, by the way. Because of the state, because of the state that the country is in. And so the country is going to have to heal and repair and then redeem and then eventually renew itself from this. The country's going to have to look at this situation and say, we got somebody very mad, very deranged, a mentally ill guy in the position, and we had norms and standards as opposed to direct guidelines and rules.

33:03Anthony Scaramucci:Anthony, what if it's not about one individual? What about, this is the question I hear recently and particularly in the last few weeks. What about if this is actually about an American system that doesn't work? Because the whole point of the checks and balance of the American system was that you would be able to prevent a president from being in a position where they threaten the whole civilization with death. The system needs reform. I accept exactly what you're saying. And this is my point. You've heard me say this. Every 80 or so years, America gets dunked. We got 1776 Civil War. We got dunked.

33:40And we got dunked again 80 years after the Civil War with the Depression and the Second World War. Now we're getting dunked again. The country doesn't have the cultural history of the European countries, a result of which every time we lose a generation of memory in this country, we go into the tar pit and we got to pull ourselves out of it again. So we will do that, but the system is going to need massive reform, constitutional amendments, and all kinds of things. And weirdly and optimistically, the Trump era, which is kind of come to an end, will hopefully lead to this reflective reform. But I want to go to the United States for a second.

34:24And I just want to say three things and get you to react to them. The United States has created its Suez Canal crisis moment. And to just remind everybody what happened, the French and the British government were in a fight with Nasser and the Egyptian government. And there was a Mexican standoff. And Eisenhower stepped in, who was by nature an anti-colonialist. And he stepped in after the fighting was not going well for the French and the British. And it was a metaphor for supposed power that was actually hollowed out or the supposed power didn't understand its position in the world.

35:14Anthony Scaramucci:It was a metaphor for end of empire. Metaphor for the end of empire. And what the United States did here has tremendously damaged the United States. You know, I love the United States with my whole heart, Cady. My grandparents loved this country in a way that I cannot describe to you, which is why I'm never leaving the United States. I would like to help fix - You're never leaving Long Island. I'm not leaving Long Island. I'd like to fix the United States, but I'm just letting you know, we have to have an honest moment in the country to understand the prestige hit that the United States has taken as a result of the stupidity of these unilateral actions by Donald Trump with the assist of Benjamin Netanyahu.

36:03And I'm just going to say these three things quickly and get your reaction. Number one, we've heard our standing in the world as a superpower. Number two, we heard our standing with those Goff allies. A lot of our bases, US newspaper, the New York Times reporting, a lot of our bases are almost uninhabitable as a result of what happened. That's not me saying it. That's the New York Times saying it. Number three, and this is the most important thing, who the hell is going to trust the United States with this type of pendulum swinging decision making? So those are the three things. And again, I'm telling you, the market's telling you that the United States could win and that the markets are going to stabilize.

36:51And Iran has been so badly weakened that you may end up toppling that regime. It's possible. But I am telling you that we've had our Suez Canal moment and we have denialism going on in our leadership.

37:05Anthony Scaramucci:So we've got a poll. We asked you guys, is this the end of the American empire? 74 % of you say yes. I suspect that number would have been pretty high if we'd asked you that question even before this fiasco in Iran. But I think you're right, Antony. Up until you had the tariffs last year that dominated last year's relationships with America and around the world. We began the beginning of the year with this military triumph of Venezuela. We then had Greenland and the fiasco around Greenland, which did enormous damage to relations with Europe. And now we have this. And here, the real problem with this for the United States is that it risks looking like a paper tiger.

37:50Anthony Scaramucci:It can spend a billion dollars a day or whatever it has cost the American military. They can rescue a pilot with extraordinary prowess. but effectively as we stand tonight the Iranians are saying now this is Iranian propaganda as well this is the 10-point plan but the president has referred to that 10-point plan the Iranians have got the uranium the sanctions relief the reparations the stopping of hostilities and control of the Strait of Hormuz I doubt in two weeks time if this holds and by the way you guys are very skeptical that this will hold and we're going to ask our next guest about that I doubt they'll get all of that.

38:30Anthony Scaramucci:But it's very hard to say tonight that America looks like they've come out of this looking like an empire, looking like a superpower, because a small country that was being obliterated with weapons degraded has managed to bring Donald Trump to the table on Iran's terms tonight, because six weeks ago, Iran did not control the states. Before we go to our next guest, how are we doing with Putin? How's he feeling about all this? I think that's the other person to talk about because I gave my list of who, you know, Geostrategic winners. Russia is obviously a big winner. We can't end the show without talking about Israel because I have statements I want to make, Katty Kay, on Israel.

39:15Okay. I know you have statements you want to make. We have a whole show to do. Let's bring in Mike Froman.

39:19Anthony Scaramucci:Let's bring in Mike Froman, the president of the Council on Foreign Relations who we spoke to when we were in Davos as well. Mike, it's great to have you back again. Thanks. Thank you for joining us. Thanks for having me. OK, what we've been asking our audience where we end up in two weeks time, does this actually hold? They seem to think that it doesn't. You're the president of the Council on Foreign Relations. Unfortunately, perhaps I'm not the president of the United States. Does it hold? Well, look, I think where are we in two weeks? This is an agreement to begin to talk, as you said. It's about to talk about the underlying issues like Iran's nuclear aspirations, what kind of military they're going to have, what kind of control they're going to have over the Strait of Hormuz, etc.

40:02So all we've agreed to today, and I don't think we should underestimate what's been agreed to today, a ceasefire is better than no ceasefire. It's good for the bombing to stop. It's good for the Strait of Hormuz to be reopened, assuming that the Iranians actually follow through on that. But this is really just the beginning of a conversation about these fundamental issues where I think the U.S. and Iran are in really quite different positions. So will it last? First of all, what does it mean for the Strait of Hormuz to be open, assuming coordination with Iranian armed forces and technical capabilities, which is some of the language that's used in the Iranian statement?

40:39Anthony Scaramucci:And that it may take some time, they're suggesting. Are they going to charge a toll? Are they going to let every ship out? Are they going to control which ships get access for priority? So there are a lot of questions there. And shippers are going to have to make the judgment about whether they are willing to take the risk of going into the Strait of Hormuz and take supplies out of there, given the uncertainty there. But again, it's a good step forward, at least, to get the two parties to talk. It doesn't make the underlying issues any easier to resolve, however. Mike, it's always good to see you, by the way.

41:13You know, Mike and I know each other 30 plus years. You know that, right? We were in law school together. You both look so young.

41:20Anthony Scaramucci:What were you in kindergarten? He doesn't have any gray hair. I don't really understand this. Well, I have a really good colorist. I have a really good colorist down the block from that beautiful apartment you're in right now. We can send you his well away. If you need a referral. And after Maduro got taken, I was using Maduro black, but this is Latin American dictator brown. That's the color, by the way. We toned it down a little. I had to tone it down at the request of Cady Kay. It was hard to look at. Okay, but serious question. I want you to talk about Israel for a second. Okay, I am a fan.

41:54I'm a supporter. I am a philo-Semite. I'm not shy of that. I'm happy to say that. But I think they've gotten hurt here, public opinion wise in the United States. Cady can give you the polling data about how Americans feel about the relationship. I think this New York Times article for Netanyahu was a disaster. I'm just being objective here. And what kind of advice, first of all, do you agree with any of that? I feel like I can read you these polls. Only 32 % of registered voters now view Israel positively, down from 47 % three years ago. Six in 10 Americans now hold an unfavorable view of Israel.

42:36That's up 20 points since 2022. The partisan breakdown is a little bit more devastating. The Democrats are harder on Israel, frankly, than the Republicans. But listen, number one, do you agree with any of that? Number two, how would you help Israel in this situation? Well, look, I think it's a tragic situation. I imagine your polls are correct, at least directionally. And, you know, Israel's reputation has, over the last few years, over the course of the Gaza War, because of the way it was prosecuted, but also because of the reporting on it and the protests and all that, I think has really led to, as you say, an isolation of Israel internationally and a decline of the coalition of support that has traditionally been there for it domestically.

43:29And I think it's a tragic situation because, you know, Israel has been a very important partner of the United States in the region, very effective in going after Iran's proxies, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis and others. very important in terms of stabilizing the situation in Syria, and of course, very important with regard to Iran itself in terms of attacking its nuclear capabilities and setting that back in a substantial way. And while a lot of the neighbors in the region will say critical things, I think they are secretly quite supportive, or behind the scenes, quite supportive of the U.S. and Israel working together.

44:12Anthony Scaramucci:Particularly those Gulf states, right? Absolutely, because Israel has fundamentally changed the security situation in the region with the U.S. support and sometimes the U.S. involvement. How does this, how does what's happened over the last six weeks, and we don't know how this story ends, right, Mike? I mean, it's very hard to see. I find it hard to see in two weeks' time America going back to bombing. But they may have to if the Iranians don't stand by this. But I think Trump clearly wants out. He wants this over with. He wants to close the door on this chapter. But how has what's happened in the last six weeks changed Israel's relationship with countries in the region, particularly those Gulf states and Saudi Arabia, Gulf states who had already signed onto the Abraham Accords, Saudi Arabia that was looking at signing onto the Abraham Accords?

45:01Well, look, I think it's instructive that no country that signed the Abraham Accords pulled out of the Abraham Accords during the entire post-October 7th Gaza war, nor in the current situation. And just like some of the countries, including Saudi Arabia, may be critical or urging the United States and Israel to step back privately, they have been urging the United States to, quote, finish the job, whatever that means. I think it's important.

45:30Anthony Scaramucci:Actually, the Gulf states and Israel are sort of on the same page. Well, I think that's right. And the fact that Iran decided to retaliate for the Israeli and U.S. strikes by striking a number of other states in the region, including Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, even Oman, I believe, has, I think, driven other countries to say, all right, Iran really is a threat to our security. and in some ways driven them closer to the United States and Israel, even if they can't really admit that publicly to their publics. You know, Mike, everything you say makes sense to me. I want to talk about Netanyahu for a second, and I want to talk about his polling in the U.S.

46:1150 % of the Americans do not trust him on world affairs, and 59 % of the Americans say that he's become the face of bad things, Mike. I don't want to go into all the bad things, but my point is Israel is a democracy. Is he the right leader right now to be running this country? And is there a chance that they will change leadership? I mean, Churchill, after the war, they went with Clement Attlee as an example. What are your thoughts on that? Look, I hardly comment on politics in the United States, let alone the politics of another country. I think it's important, though, that we separate the individual from the country and from national interests.

46:57We need to be doing in the region what is in the U.S. national interests. And to a certain degree, those may be aligned with Israel. In other cases, they may not be identical. And we need, I think, to just keep a clear eye on where our interests lie and make sure that we're following them. I think it's unfortunate that when this most recent conflict with Iran broke out, that there was a portrayal that the U.S. had been dragged into it by Israel. The U.S. should be deciding whether to deploy military force and putting our soldiers at risk for U.S. interests. I think we do do that. And I think it's important that as the administration laid out what their military objectives were vis-a-vis Iran, that we steady focus on those, even if they're different than what Israel wanted.

47:41And we had Bridge Colby, top Pentagon official at the Council of War Relations at the beginning of the war. And he laid out what the military objectives were and indicated that Israel may have different objectives, including regime change, which may go beyond what the US wanted. I think it's a really fair answer. I have a tremendous amount of respect for you. So I'm now going to flip the question to a different side of the conversation. I've made you the war decision-making czar. You are in the situation room. Sorry, Mike. It's 39 days earlier than today. That is called a demotion, by the way.

48:18Let me give you the good news. Let me give you the good news. You're the war decision-making czar. You're going to make the decision to go into war. But I have arrived with the position paper. And I've said, Michael, before you make the decision, this is where we're going to be on the 39th day of the war. The straits are going to be closed. This is going to be the economic damage. $2 million a ship to get through the strait. Yes, we will have degraded them and potentially been more secure from military structure, but this is what's going to happen to our bases. This is how everything's going to unfold.

48:53And we're going to be in a 15-day Mexican standoff organized by the Pakistani. So I've now given you clairvoyance and I've told you here you are 40 days later, here is everything. Would you have made the decision based on everything that we know today, hindsight not being 2020, hindsight being 2010. Would you make the decision? Like I've been in the situation room, not always for decisions like that. And you wish you had clairvoyance about the future. I hope that the decision makers or the advisors around the president did lay out, including the risk that the straightforward moves would be closed and the impact it had on the global economy, because that seems to have maybe not caught them by surprise, but sort of changed the dynamic.

49:41You know, look, Anthony, Iran has terrorized the region and worked against U.S. interests for 47 years. We've tried engagement. We've tried sanctions. We crossed the threshold last year working with Israel to bomb their nuclear plants. And I actually think the most likely course going forward is that we will be, to Kadi's point, We probably will be bombing Iran regularly every time we see them rebuilding their missile capability or trying to rebuild a nuclear capability or trying to close the Strait of Hormuz again. And I think we just have to realize that we are fundamentally different interests there.

50:23And as long as this revolutionary regime exists in Iran, we're likely to be in a conflict with them that requires this. So that's a long way of not answering your question, Anthony, other than to say, I think there were important military objectives that the U.S. laid out. I feel like there was potential that the administration did not take sufficient account into the nature of asymmetric warfare. You know, Henry Kissinger wrote an important article in Foreign Affairs Once Upon a Time about Vietnam, which basically said, you know, the Vietnamese just have to not lose. The U.S. has to win. And the same thing could be applied here.

51:05The U.S. has to basically wipe out all the missiles, all the drones, all the capabilities. What Iran has shown is that no matter how significantly their military capabilities are degraded, if they survive and have a small number of projectiles, they could wreak a fair amount of havoc on the global economy. We are not immune to that, even though we are a much bigger energy producer than we were a decade or two ago. And therefore, the pain is felt by us. And I think what the Iranians have shown, like the Chinese showed on critical minerals, and like the U.S. showed in its control over the dollar financial system, when you've got these choke points, you can really use your leverage in a disproportionate way to bring others to the table.

51:50And that's exactly what Iran has demonstrated.

51:52Anthony Scaramucci:If other countries that have control of choke points are going to be looking at their choke points a little bit more checking out as a result of this. Okay, we have a couple of minutes left, but I want to bring up a question that's come up several times and throw this forward, just two weeks forward. I'm actually demoting you either further and making you Vice President J.D. Vance. So you've gone down from President of Council of Foreign Relations to Waza to Vice President of the United States. You are the person, the point, you're running point on these negotiations for the next two weeks. Where are we, Michael, in two weeks time?

52:26Anthony Scaramucci:Does this turn itself from a temporary ceasefire into something that is long term and sustainable and we can bring those American forces home and we get back to something like the status quo ante? Or do you think bombing starts again? If we are back to something like the status quo ante, what does it look like? So, look, I think we're likely to get back to a certain degree to where we were before, but with the new factor that the Iranians have now realized or demonstrated their capability of using a choke point as leverage anytime in the future. So you think the two weeks turns into something more permanent?

53:07Anthony Scaramucci:You don't think we're back to the war in two weeks' time? I think there's going to be a re-looking at our negotiating objectives. For example, the president has said Iran has to commit not to pursue nuclear weapons. Well, Iran has committed to that for a long period of time. I think we have to figure out whether they have any ability to refine uranium for any purpose whatsoever, even for just medical purposes, for MRI machines and things of that sort, or excuse me, for radiation machines, x-rays. And so I think we need to sort of look at all of our objectives and see if it's truly negotiable or not.

53:40But, you know, I think we underestimate, we tend to underestimate how much pain the Iranians are willing to go through. They went through an eight year war with Iraq, a tremendous cost to their people, their economy, their country. And I think they feel like, again, all they have to do is survive as a regime. And therefore, they may be less motivated to abandon their longstanding objectives than the U.S. thinks. Thanks. So as we're speaking, Michael, the news is reporting that Iran is still bombing Israel, still sending missiles into Israel. So is that a breach?

54:14Anthony Scaramucci:This could be what we talked about that they don't, that not all of the commanders know yet, right? This could be a communications issue. We don't know. I think that's right. We really don't know. But it's possible. I mean, given the decapitation of so much of their civilian, religious and military intelligence of military leadership, I don't think we have great visibility into how decisions are being made and communicated down. In fact, we know that at least at some point, the previous Ayatollah had given instructions that if something were to happen, local commanders had the authority to act on their own.

54:47And so this may well be, as Katty said, sort of folks just acting on their own before it's been fully implemented. And I would hope the U.S. would create at least a degree of patience to make sure that Iran has a chance to fully implement what they have allegedly agreed to.

55:07Anthony Scaramucci:Okay, Mike, thank you very much. Thanks for having me. Great to see you, Mr. Froman. I'm very tempted to ask you how you like your tacos, but we will pass on that. We will pass. Chicken. He likes chicken tacos like the rest of us. We like chicken tacos. Oh, harsh. Mike, thanks very much for joining us. That wasn't a criticism of Froman. That was a explanation of the present. Well, look, there's a ton to talk about, right? So let's go to these questions. Is that okay? I'm going to go to some of these star questions. Yeah, let's give a few questions, yeah. So do you believe NATO will persevere without the US?

55:39Arguably, there's a greater need. I think NATO will persevere without the US, or maybe the US will still be in NATO, but not functionally. No one will believe the Article 5 promise while Donald Trump is president. Anthony, is a ceasefire purely economical decision by Trump. That is a clear yes. Kat, do you want to chime in on that one? Yeah. That's a yes, triple yes. What we said yesterday, we said he's not going to do it. And I told you why. He's not going to do it.

56:06Anthony Scaramucci:It would tank the American economy. The tech bros don't want him to do it. It's costing an awful lot of money and Americans are much more concerned about what's happening at the pump. So when is Trump's deadline on Iran? I think we're looking at two weeks time, but I think effectively it's over tonight. It was interesting to hear Mike agree with that. It seems, I think it's unlikely that Trump's going to want to go back to bombing in two weeks time. Now he just has to negotiate the most elegant terms of surrender effectively or withdrawal. Perhaps we don't call it surrender, withdrawal that he can.

56:41Anthony Scaramucci:Anthony, is this going to be a long-term war? No. Could there be extended bombings as Mr. Froman said possibly, but I don't think so. I think this is going to be it. If anything, I'm worried about the long-term tenure of Donald Trump. I know people think I'm exaggerating. I think he's really unwell. What's interesting is if I asked Froman, which I wouldn't have asked him this question because I know Michael for 30 plus years, I would have said, Trump, is he Meshuggah, is he crazy? And should he be knocked out of office? He wouldn't have answered the question because he's at the Council of Foreign Relations.

57:22He's a diplomat. But Polymeropolis answered the question. He said, bye-bye. The guy's nuts. Okay. And this is the problem now. I think we got to get everybody over the threshold of diplomacy and into the nut category so that we can handle this in a bipartisan way. And again, if you're a Republican out there, J.D. Vance will your president. He's a Republican.

57:45Anthony Scaramucci:There is no sign that there is any bipartisanship coming. You've got every Democrat in the country up in arms about the president threatening to destroy civilization. And by the way, they gave the same pushback. Those Democrats have no standing because they gave the same pushback with Joe Biden. Joe Biden wasn't even functioning. Yes. So this is an embarrassment at both sides, an indictment at both sides. Let's go to this question. Where are the president's men? Kat, you answered that. What happened to Rubio and Vance? Where is Marjorie Taylor Greene, my new hero? Vance is swanning around Hungary.

58:22Anthony Scaramucci:You might ask why he's swanning around Hungary trying to support a MAGA, Viktor Orban, when he's got negotiations to sort out. But I am told that Vance is going to be the point person on these negotiations. He didn't want to have anything to do with the beginning of the war or as little as possible, but he is now prepared to be the person that tries to oversee the end of the war. So he's going to be negotiating that. Rubio, actually, we have not heard very much from for the last few days. We know that Rubio, I mean, I've known Rubio for years. I have interviewed him very many times. I was with him when he was very first running for the Senate, when he was young and accessible and very candid.

59:00Anthony Scaramucci:There is no way he would have wanted this to happen the way that it happened. Our reporting, both of us, is that there was a big split in the White House and Vance on Rubio were on the side of please don't do this, it's not a good idea. They got overruled by the President with the influence of Netanyahu and Hexeth, by the way. And whereas MTG will end with her, she is the one that has come out very opposed to this war. And particularly today, one of the few Republican voices, I don't know if she still calls herself a Republican, but one of the few Republican voices to come out and say that the President should be removed from office on the grounds of insanity because of the tweet threatening the end of a civilization.

59:38Anthony Scaramucci:So that's where they all are. And I suspect you're not going to see more partisanship. They will try to brush this under the rug from the Republican point of view, and they will fall in line. They'll call this a victory. They'll say well done to the president for playing 3D chess and getting the Straits of Hormuz back open, even though the Straits of Hormuz were open before this all started. So watch the next two weeks. It's going to be an interesting two weeks of negotiations. Guys, we will be back later this week. Thank you very much. Those of you who are worried that Anthony and I are up at two in the morning, little secret, I'm in Washington DC, Anthony's in New York, so actually it's only nine o 'clock for us.

1:00:16I'm not letting you out of here without me answering the Froman question, okay?

1:00:20Anthony Scaramucci:Okay. Stupid war, Katty Kaye. And if you knew everything at the end, what I just listed, you'd be like, okay - I think it's hard to believe that any of them would have - Hey guys, stupid, stupid war, Katty Kaye. I actually think the president, if he had known where he was going to end up, he also would - Stupid war category. And it's really bad on all fronts and a lot of reparation, a lot of work needs to be done to repair things. And it's humiliating for the United States. And it's the facts. And we have to tell the truth here on this network. Okay. Okay. Bye, guys. We'll see you next week. Thanks for joining us.

1:00:54Anthony Scaramucci:Bye, guys.

1:01:04Anthony Scaramucci:Think Verizon is expensive? Think again. Anyone can bring their AT &T or T-Mobile bill to a Verizon store today and we'll give you a better deal. So bring us your bill. Walk in, run in, pogo stick in, teleport if you can. Ride on the back of a rollerblading yak or fly in on the wings of a majestic falcon. Any way you can, bring your AT &T or T-Mobile bill to a Verizon store today and we'll give you a better deal on the best network. Based on RootMetric's best overall mobile network performance, U.S. second half 2025, all rights reserved. Must provide a very recent postpaid consumer mobile bill in the name of the person redeeming the deal.

1:01:32Anthony Scaramucci:Additional terms, conditions, and restrictions apply.