Should We Be Worried About the Iran Deal?

Hey guys, have you heard of Goldbelly? It's this amazing site where they ship the most iconic, famous foods from restaurants across the country, anywhere nationwide. I've never found a more perfect gift than food. Goldbelly ship Chicago deep dish pizza, New York bagels, main lobster rolls, and even Eina Gardens famous cakes. So, if you're looking for a gift for the food lover in your life, head to goldbelly.com and get 20% off your first order with promo code gift. That's goldbelly.com promo code gift. Have you ever stopped and thought about what's actually powering your day? The coffee you made this morning, the drive you took to get here, even the device you're listening on. I'm Tanner Faust, and that's exactly the kind of thing we're going to talk about on the energy tailgate, a podcast from Chevron. I'll be your host inviting guests to discuss big energy topics and what they mean for everyday life, all from the tailgate of our truck. This is the energy tailgate. Reese Witherspoon here checking into my favorite hotel in Paris. Bonjour. I'm traveling with my Wells Fargo autographed journey card, so I earn rewards wherever I book travel. Five times points with hotels, four times with airlines, three times on restaurants and other travel, and one point on other purchases. That was a lot. I need to lie down. Is the room ready? Visit Wells Fargo.com slash autographed journey. Terms apply. From the heart of our nation's capital, Washington, D.C., backed by the trusted voices of Team Fox, a clear, fresh voice cutting through the noise to tell the truth. It's Guy Benson with Guy Benson.

It is Tuesday, June 16th, 2026. I'm Guy Benson. Welcome everyone to Guy Benson. So glad to have you with us for the next three hours between 3 and 6 p.m. Eastern every weekday. And if you miss any of it, you can join us around the clock on demand on our podcast, which is the entire show. No charge at all. Guy Benson.com, Fox Newspodcast.com, or wherever you get your favorite podcasts. I'm a political analyst at Fox News, a senior columnist at the Washington Examiner I've written today actually about Iran. You can check out that piece. I have a lot to say here coming up on that front. You can email us, GBS at fox.com. You can follow us on social media at Guy Benson. I'm at Guy Benson personally, and we give out that information all the time because we always have new listeners, including today as we welcome some new affiliates into Guy Benson Radio family, including News Talk 1025 FM and 1440 AM in Anna, Illinois, and also... K-R-L-L-A-M, News Talk 1420, in a city called California, Missouri. So welcome aboard. As we continue to expand our affiliates in this growing family, we are thrilled. And there's a few more in the pipeline as well. So thanks to all of you as this show continues to grow. On the program today. Brigadier General John Tykert retired U.S. Air Force, he will join us this hour to react to some of the reporting and now this debate over the so-called Iran deal. Then what about the economic fallout and impact? Economist Steve Moore will be here in our next hour. Brad Thor is... Just a blockbuster success in the thriller department. He writes these thriller novels every year. His new one is out today. I got an advanced copy. I read it. I loved it. Brad will be here talking about that great Father's Day gift, great beach reading for the summer. We'll talk to him. And then the former acting director of ICE, Jonathan Fahey, will join us as well. A lot of developments on the immigration front to ask him about. That is all ahead. Now, I want to talk about Iran, this memorandum of understanding, the deal what is or is not in it, and the fact that we still haven't seen it. Now, it is true that the Dow and the markets are exploding. They're loving. this news. We know that the price of oil is coming down precipitously. Also good news for American consumers. That's definitely something that has to be a consideration for any American policymaker. And I don't want to just dismiss those. And in fact, we'll talk about those factors with Steve Moore in the next hour. What I am concerned about, and let me just say, I have been, and what I try to do on this show is be intellectually honest.

and support the president when he's right, pick my spots if I think he's wrong, and I have been extremely positive, very supportive of his policy vis-à-vis Iran, going back to his first administration, pulling out of the terrible Obama-era JCPOA, taking out Soleimani. This term, Operation Midnight Hammer. Then supporting Israel, letting them do their thing in the 12-day war this year. I guess there was also a big war last year as well, but the Israelis helping us this time around. And then Epic Fury. I think all of that was necessary, clear-eyed, tough American leadership that absolutely fell under the America First doctrine. And I said so very proudly. And I still believe those things. I am getting concerned about this process and this so-called deal or agreement, which we still haven't seen even the memo of understanding. which apparently then lays out a 60-day timeline to hash out and hammer out some of the most important details moving forward. There are a couple of things that are front-loaded in terms of what this memo would then trigger. It's apparently already been signed the ceremony on Friday in Switzerland, as scheduled as just a formality. And then the administration tells us some of the other important things that Iran wants. namely sanctions relief and many billions of dollars, none of that goes to them until after they have verifiably kept their commitments on other fronts, which, again, at least theoretically, sounds good. We have not seen the memo. Although it is now starting to get leaked, or at least allegedly get leaked, right? I can't vouch for some of these documents that are now floating around on social media. There's a Saudi Arabian media outlet that leaked the key elements of it. I saw that there was someone from a well-known think tank here in the U.S. that was leaking what he was told is this memo. I cannot again vouch for its authenticity, but the fact that we're looking at these things is because we don't have the memo itself published by the administration. And I saw Vice President JD Vance saying, oh, well, protocols, look, if it has already been signed. Obviously, our administration has it. The Iranians have it, and they've been putting out all sorts of claims, some of which the Trump administration has been swatting down, saying, no, that's not true, that's not true. Then you've got other diplomats, and there were multiple other governments involved in this, where presumably the Pakistanis have it, the Saudis apparently have it. I think the Qataris could have it.

There are reports now confirmed in Israeli media that the Israeli government are closest allies in that region, asked to see the memo and were rebuffed. The Trump administration reportedly said no, which I think is pretty breathtaking, especially considering the fact that this deal at least purports to constrain potentially the Israelis in what they can do vis-a-vis Hezbollah and Lebanon. Although my understanding is they're still allowed to act in self-defense, but I'm sure there's lots of thorny questions about, okay, what exactly does that look like? Where are the battle lines, if you will? What would be, what would count, what would constitute self-defense? Would there be certain, you know, rules in place here? You at least have to get some Israeli buy-in on that. Right, on the rules of engagement and all this, if we are going to put together a deal with Iran controlling its proxy in Hezbollah that is at least supposed to be, in theory, binding to the Israelis, having them cut out of the process and not even seeing the memo that's produced. I don't really see how that's defensible given the fact that enough other people have the memo that it's now been leaked. I've been calling for them to just release the memo, publish it. So we can stop this game of telephone. He said, she said, I heard this. Well, I heard that. Put it out there. Because there's so much time, I think, being wasted. with the administration putting out their version of events and their spin while contradicting some of the inevitable propaganda coming from the Iranian regime and trying to keep track of what is real and what isn't without even having the memo. I just don't think that's serving anyone's interests. So I'll start there. There's also reporting from a very well-sourced Axios reporter. that internally there have been divisions over this deal and over this memo. And again, reportedly, and a lot of this is a bit opaque, but this Axios reporter has been told that you had the Steve Witkoff-Jared Kushner-JD Vance side that seems to have prevailed in favor of this deal and this memo. And the number one salesman, at least publicly for this, is Vice President JD Vance. He's all over the place. Now he's doing a book tour, but of course he's being asked about this. parenthetically he was on the view earlier and did a very good job in many ways right so that is one of his strengths going into hostile territory with a media environment and doing well and he did so again today i am worried

about some of the things that are apparently in this memo, where JD Vance internally is one of the key champions of this, whereas on the other side of it, at least the skeptics or people who are opposed to this, include, allegedly, Marco Rubio, Secretary Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John Ratcliffe. Some of this based on apparently reportedly intelligence that we had picked up from the Iranians who were telling us one thing in the meetings and then reporting back to the home base in Tehran something completely different, which, again, as always, calls into question their credibility, their veracity, any ability to trust them. I'm also not loving some of what I'm calling the Pollyannish pie in the sky rhetoric now that we're hearing from both the president and the vice president about the nature of the regime. Yes, a lot of the top leadership was liquidated, and then the next level down liquidated. And so you're on like the C team here. I don't believe that the evil... pro-terrorism, fanatical, anti-American nature of the regime has changed at all. It'd be nice, but I don't want to hang my hat on it. My attitude generally is, if they still hate us, fine. If they're going to get a deal where they get huge amounts of money, it only happens if they completely surrender on the nuclear issue. And having read at least versions of what has been leaked of this memo, it is a very vague bullet point. There's tons of bullet points about what Iran gets and the timing and all this money and this sort of fund that's crowdsourced from other countries that could help them get back on their feet and all of the carrots and all the money that they need because they are drowning as a regime. economically, having been crushed in many key ways militarily as well. And they've drawn us into their world. Their orbit is these talks. They love talking and talking and talking. And previous American administrations, especially Obama, certainly Biden as well, they seem so obsessed with getting to a deal with these people that they lost track of what matters a lot more. And Trump's triumph in my mind has been not falling into that. trap. And my concern here is that maybe the administration, at least the prevailing faction of it, has gotten into this cul-de-sac where they so badly want a deal to then wave it around and say, look what we've done, that they've given away, at least theoretically, a lot in exchange for assurances and follow-through TBD. And I don't trust the regime because they shouldn't be trusted. President Trump is at least out there suggesting, well, it could be a new day with new people. Here he was at the G7, cut five. We're dealing with people that I think are very rational people. They were nice to deal with. There were strong people, smart people. I think actually they're smarter than the first and second group. But they're not radicalized.

you know, looking to help their country. Not radicalized, very rational. I hope that's true, but count me deeply, deeply skeptical of that. And that should not be the baseline of expectation. The deal should be so tough that it doesn't matter how radical the leaders are. They have to, through coercion, do their part, or they get nothing in terms of the money and the bombing resumes. That's how I look at it. Vice President JD Vance on CNN, making a similar point that, again, has me a little bit on edge given the fundamentalist nature of this regime, cut 41. For 47 years, this country has been a thorn on our side. It's been kind of a basket case for Democrat and Republican administrations. The coolest thing about the progress we've made over the last few weeks is that you see people within the Iranian system, senior leadership, even IRGC officials say, you know what, we may have some animosity, we may have some mistrust, but we recognize the way that we've done business with the United States for 47 years as a mistake. Let's try something else. I strongly suspect that even if there might be some figures within the regime who might be having a change of heart and I want to turn over a new leaf, that that is just a manipulation and they're playing us to make it seem like, oh, no, we've changed. Aren't we wonderful and reasonable? I don't care about any of that. I care about results specifically on the nuclear piece, which is the most important thing, bar none. And on that key, key point, I want to drill down just a little bit more. Let me take a break. We will continue this conversation on the other side. As we get started on this Tuesday, it's Guy Benson. Keep it right here. A fresh perspective on the topics of the day. It's Guy Benson. When it comes to my policy, Farmers gives it to me straight, so there's no surprises. It's your coverage. You should never be confused. You hear that? An insurance provider with a conscience. We're a choir, but yes, we have that too. Straightforward coverage you can literally understand. That's what you get when. You have farmers. Bump, bum, bum, bum, bum, bum. Learn more at farmers.com. Underwritten by farmers' truck or fire insurance exchanges or affiliate. Products not available in every state. I'm Guy Benson, we're back. There are all these comparisons flying around. President Obama's deal with Iran and this one under Trump. And as I said yesterday, all that's premature because we don't know what this one is. The indications, the leaks are raising some red flags for me, honestly. However, Trump's policy on Iran is infinitely better than Obama's because of all the front-loaded strength.

including back in the first administration, taking out Soleimani unapologetically, and then Midnight Hammer, Epic Fury, that muscle, that imposition of our will on Iran in extremely consequential ways as a prelude to any sort of deal is like unrecognizably different than the Obama talk only approach. So let's just make that clear. However, given the advantage that we built for ourselves with the Israelis and some other partners in the Gulf, sinking the Navy, dominating their airspace, crushing their nuclear program, hugely degrading their missile program, all of that, it seems like you had this regime dangling by a thread with a lot of their top brass dead. And then now we're in this vortex of talks where a lot of the advantage seems to have now seesawed back to them because they love talking and lying. And as I think about this, at least based on the leaks that I've seen of this memo, the whole ballgame, at least most of it, is on the nuclear component. If we get all of their quote-unquote nuclear dust, the enriched uranium, out of the country and destroyed, if that occurs and, crucially, the nuclear weapons program is verifiably dismantled, gone. If this deal after 60 days drives a dagger into the nuclear program of Iran permanently. Then some of the apparent omissions, like on the terror proxies, on the missile program, omissions that were, I think, weaknesses, big ones of Obama's deal, the fatal flaw being sunset clauses and endpoints on the restrictions, right, where you had basically a blessed nuclear program. for Iran at the conclusion of these expiration dates. That was the fatal flaw, but there were other ones. I'm open to indulging some weakness and some concessions as long as the nuclear peace is done the right way. And I would like to see rock solid assurances on that. And I will ask our next guest on that subject to several questions after this.

At Pfizer, we are committed to listening to and learning from patients and their care teams so that we can work to help address their unmet needs. From early discovery to clinical trials, through approval and use of our medicines, patients are at the heart of everything we do. Learn more at cancer.fizer.com. Talking about the issues you care about, Guy Benson. We're back here on Guy Benson. Thank you for being with us. Guy Benson.com, the website podcast free every day. President Trump said yesterday that he expects that the memo that we're talking about will be published. He said after Friday in the signing ceremony in Switzerland, another administration official said no, it would be coming perhaps sooner midweek. Trump says at some point he'll read it aloud word for word. I think it should have been put out days ago. Before it was signed ideally, Congress, I think it's appropriate for them to review this as well. I would like to see it as soon as possible, and I think it's already overdue. And I don't like the fact that the Israelis were not given access to at least see it. I think if we're going to be debating it and having this conversation with the administration saying, well, this is true, but that isn't, and Iran is lying about that, but not this, let us see it. That's been my position here for a couple of days, as I also try to analyze and assess what is there and then what isn't there yet and what might be left out entirely in these negotiations that apparently are kicking off for 60 days. Joining us now to discuss Brigadier General John Teichert, retired of the U.S. Air Force. It's great to have you back here, sir. Guy, thanks again for having me. Well, I'm trying not to... Tear my hair out too much. I see a lot of people, especially conservatives, very upset with the Trump administration over this. I think that Trump's instincts and hard-nosed, clear-eyed view of Iran has been overall throughout his first term and the first year plus of this term has been very good. So I want to give him a lot of benefit of the doubt here, but I'm a little anxious here about... how this might play out because it seems as though there are some weasel words being used about the Iranians getting access to money which would be a lifeline to this awful regime not necessarily American dollars, but maybe from some coalition of other countries that are kind of part of this or party to it, where there would be at least some early carrots for the regime, and maybe not as many sticks that they're worried about in terms of noncompliance. I know they want money down the line and sanctions relief.

The administration keeps saying none of that's going to happen in any sort of American official capacity until they have, you know, demonstrated with X, Y, and Z that they're doing their part of the deal. Based on the leaks, at least, it looks like the key question in all of this, the really driving force behind last summer's bombings and this year's war, this nuclear program, I mean, there are scant details at all. And they're telling us that Iran is going to let us take out the nuclear dust. We're getting kind of a... Very difficult to digest evolving nebulous answer on whether or not the whole program will get demolished and dismantled or not. Am I reading too much into this with concern, or are you seeing some ripples out there that might be harbingers in your mind? Guy, I think I'm absorbing this in the same way as you are. And I'm an eternal optimist. And I have a glimmer of hope here, but I have a healthy dose of skepticism because we're dealing with Iran who's had malign intent and activity for the last 47 years. And maybe most importantly, 10 weeks ago when we entered into the current ceasefire, there was one and only one precondition on them. And that was opening up the straight, no strings attached, and that never came to fruition. They didn't do it. Nope, they didn't. So I'm worried that we're marching down that same path. Now, I think there's three different things we can do to mitigate that risk or to make sure this is a good deal. And we've got to hold the administration accountable to all three. Number one, that we've got to make sure, as the vice president promised. that this is a performance-based plan. That means that Iran does not get any of the major benefits of the deal until they demonstrate major compliance to the deal. And by the way, can I just jump in? Before you get to two and three, he, I think, JD Vance, is sort of playing some rhetorical games where he's saying there's not a dime of American money that would flow to them unless they've hit those benchmarks. But to me... You have to look at the totality of the deal with a holistic view of the universe of money that could flow to them. I don't care if it is technically our money or if it's some other country that's been read into this and helping us and doing our bidding in some way. If Iran's coffers are filling up in any way, that's a benefit to them, and that should not happen until they are actually... proving the good faith and the results on their end. And I feel like just...

playing, you know, parsing it out and saying, oh, it's only American money. I think, I hope that that's not an evasion here, but my antenna's up on that. Because the Obama people played the same games. Yep. No, and I agree with you. And it actually leads to number two, which is what does it cost us? And I don't mean out of American coffers. I mean, how much are we enabling the Iranian regime to rebuild and reconstitute? So we're just entering or starting the next cycle of their malign activity. And we can't be giving them too much because frankly, they've been on the ropes for the last 10 weeks. We were on the verge of decisive military activity 10 weeks ago. We gave them a lifeline. And I fear that anything that we give them as a part of this deal has to be judged not just against the short term standard of what does it do today, but how does it enable that regime and their malign intent down the road? And that's number two. And the number three, and I think this is the biggest mitigating factor here, Guy. We've got to hold the administration accountable. And that is how is the administration and this deal holding Iran accountable? And I firmly believe that if we see any backsliding or delays or bad faith, then the administration has to not only say, but follow through with an end to the deal. and the resumption of decisive military activity, because otherwise Iran's just going to keep playing the game they are so well known for, and we will get played as a result. Yeah, and so, I mean, look, we've already done and achieved a lot, and I do hate it, frankly, when any analysis is offered, including sometimes I think people on the right kind of glide past this, and we shouldn't. All the things that President Trump... has done with the Israelis to degrade this regime, their nuclear program, the bombing campaign, all of that. It totally changed the landscape. It is unrecognizable from the pre-JCPOA, for example, situation. And that's all for the better. I'm very glad that all of that happened. I don't want to lose sight of that. But by the same token, If you are then going to take your boot off the neck of this regime when they were on the brink of collapse, and then enter these negotiations and have these endless talks and not come into the room, and obviously I'm not privy to these conversations. I just don't understand why we don't show up and say, hi, everyone. There's a lot of new faces here in the room because a lot of your friends are dead because we killed them, and we knew where they were because the Israelis have penetrated your regime, and they've got great intelligence. And so the deal is, if you want to personally survive, And if you want any chance of your ability to govern to continue and to have money or anything else, you will do exactly what we say. And if you follow through on those things, then fine. We can talk and we can smile for the cameras. If not, you get no money. And as a matter of fact, you will suffer the same fate as your colleagues who are now six feet under. We had all of that leverage. And I don't understand why this negotiation would give the Iranians.

at least theoretically, so much. Why give them anything, right? If we're going to have these negotiations, why not just finish up the bombing and then say, okay, we're done. We're going to have an international force keeping the straight of Hormuz open. We're not going to go any further militarily, but why take the step of a big negotiation and handing them billions of dollars? If we can't actually achieve every single one, or at least the vast majority of the war aims at the outset of Epic Fury, that's something that I'm struggling to understand. Guy, your intuition is right on that. And the only language that the Iranian regime respects and even understands is strength, capability, will, and resolve. And 10 weeks ago, when we entered into that ceasefire, the moment we saw their backsliding, we should have resumed military activity. Instead, we gave the initiative to the Iranians. And now to some extent, they have it going into these talks. I have this glimmer of hope that the deal is going to be structured in the right way and not cost us too much, and we're going to hold them accountable. But we have to hold our own administration accountable to make sure that they are pressured in the right way such that they don't give up on things that we so desperately need them to stand strong on. Yeah, okay. So on that point, and. Unlike some other people, I'm not sitting here, you know, freaking out and calling the whole thing catastrophic, despite some of these growing misgivings that I have for a number of reasons, some of the comments that I played earlier from the president and vice president that I think are, I don't want to call them naive, but very optimistic about changing nature of this regime. I don't believe that. And I think you've got to structure everything absent any sort of wishcasting about the nature of the regime. I am even willing to say, and I was just starting to make this point in the last segment, General, I am willing to say even if we don't get a bunch of meaningful restrictions on their malign activities through these terrorism proxies. Trump has been telling us that's going to be part of the deal. The rumor is it's not going to be in the deal, not even part of the negotiation. I don't love that. I think that would be a significant climb down by the U.S. if that's true. And that would be a fair criticism of this. But I'm willing to absorb that. I'm willing to see, for example, the missile program not in the crosshairs of this deal either. The truly existential question here, Iran's nuclear program, is put to bed forever. If this deal gets the nuclear dust out and their whole program dismantled,

I'm sort of willing to concede a few other things, even though I don't love it, because the thing that makes it existential is the nuclear threat for the United States, for our people abroad, for our allies in that region. If we well and truly, in a bulletproof, verifiable way through coercion and their nuclear program, I think overall on balance, this will have been worth it. You know, you've seen, I'm sure the rumors and leaks and all of that. It's still waiting to see. I want to withhold judgment. We'll see what plays out over 60 days. But I'm at least getting a little bit concerned that maybe there's wiggle room on that question a little bit. And it won't be quite as ironclad, black and white as we were led to believe, including very recently by the administration. If there's any movement in the wrong direction there, in my view, this thing starts to become, notwithstanding all the progress that we have achieved militarily, and he gets lots of credit for that in my book, but then the deal starts to look really problematically weak in Obama-esque, and I truly hope that's not going to be the case. Guy, I think you're right. And going back to what you said in the beginning, that because we can't see the MOU, that you and I are just playing a guessing game and we're hearing comments from the administration, but we can't see it in black and white for ourselves. But when it comes to the nuclear issue, we've got to be firm that anything that we insist or demand from them about their nuclear program is permanent. It's irreversible, and it's verifiable. And anything short of that leaves the door open for a reconstitution that is an existential threat to us, and we must not allow it to be so. So what, just from a technical standpoint, what should we be looking for if we're going to assess this in a fair-minded way? And again, I don't know how much to believe on the stuff that is now out there online from sources that appear to be credible that would at least what we're told is what this memo is, which again is raising a number of these flares for me where I'm like, oh, I'm not loving all of this. But much of it is just kind of like yet another ceasefire, and you're very much right to point out. Last ceasefire, the Iranians immediately reneged on their one deliverable. They didn't do it. Not a great sign. But this looks like a 60-day ceasefire where they get a fair amount. They get the lifting of the blockade. We're supposedly getting the Strait of Hermuz open. And then everything else comes after that. I'm looking like a hawk at this nuclear question in terms of like that. technical elements of ending their nuclear program, what would, in your mind, need to be in there that would be not like a smoke show and to, you know, some razzle to make it seem like it's a serious thing? What would the real article, the real McCoy look like in terms of concessions by the Iranians and verification processes and all of that that you think would satisfy the standard that you just laid out?

Guys, the two pieces to it is that they have no highly enriched uranium and they have no capacity to enrich uranium. indigenously in Iran. And those are the areas, again, with ironclad verification from UN and maybe other trusted inspectors. Those are the elements. They can't have the enriched material that they've got and they can't have the ability to enrich. It's got to all be permanently dismantled. And that's got to be verified. Otherwise, we just don't know. And it continues to be an existential threat. Yeah. And as I think about this, ideally a great deal. which I think would be best made with all the leverage in that boot on the neck is everything you just mentioned on the nukes plus the missile stuff. I know that we've really degraded their ability to produce more of them. So that's a very good thing. And it's very difficult and expensive to reconstitute. And the Israelis have tons of intel and they can do what they do. And then also the terror proxies. I would like to have seen all of that dealt with in a great deal. I am willing to say it could still be a good deal if the nuclear thing is dealt with in the way that you just described. Something short of that, it becomes not a good deal. I want to wait. I want to see there's the benefit of the doubt that I've been talking about. I'm just laying down some markers here, and it sounds like you and I are in agreement on that point, and we shall see how this unfolds very, very soon. Brigadier General John Teichert, U.S. Air Force retired on Guy Benson. Thank you very much, sir. Guy, awesome discussion. Thank you. And we will be right back. In the swamp, not of the swamp. Guy Benson. Hey, it's Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. Now, I was looking for fun ways to tell you that Mint's offer of unlimited premium wireless for $15 a month is back. So I thought it would be fun if we made $15 bills. But it turns out that's very illegal. So there goes my big idea for the commercial. Give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch. Up front payment of $45 for three months, $90 for six months, or $180 for 12-1 plan required. $15 per month equivalent. Taxes and fees extra. Initial plan term only, greater than 50 gigabytes, me slow when network is busy. See terms. Back on Guy Benson. So on Zohran Mamdani, the kami mayor in New York City. He's endorsed a challenger in a congressional race in New York from a woman who...

has rooted on terrorists and was out on the street celebrating October 7th. She is exactly as awful as you think she might be. Someone cut from that cloth. She was in a candidate forum with the congressman from New York that she is challenging. These are both Democrats. They had this forum slash debate a few days ago on Channel 11 in New York, and they were asked a lighthearted question. Listen to the question. And then the answers from both of these people who are running for Congress of the United States. States. Cut 38. World Cup is here. The first match this weekend at MetLife Stadium taking place in New Jersey, even though some people say it is technically New York. But what do you think will win it all? Who are you rooting for? I like Mexico. Mexico. There you go. I'm rooting for Senegal. I saw the headline that neither one of them said America. I thought, well, maybe the anchor and posing the question and said, well, aside from Team USA, obviously, who else are you rooting for? No, nope. That's not what he asked. He was setting the scene. The World Cup's arriving. The game is about to start. This has happened late last week. Who are you rooting for? The incumbent Democrat answered Mexico, which is kind of on the nose in a number of ways. And then his left-wing communist challenger, she's rooting for Senegal. Now, I've nothing against the Mexican or Senegalese soccer teams, but how is not the only answer for people running for the U.S. Congress? I'm rooting for Team USA. Is that bad politics in a Democratic primary? That's just an incredible thing. Neither one of them said USA. Oh, another hour coming up.

Pays checkout is offered by your banks and credit unions. So when you shop online at participating merchants, your cards appear in one place, ready to use, and kept up to date. And the best part, your actual card number isn't shared when you check out, because boundaries are healthy, like no work emails after six. One small step for boundaries, one big leap for checkout. Pays, it checks out. Activation required. See Pays.com to learn more. Terms and conditions apply. generation of conservative talk right here right now fair fun and backed by the trusted voices and reporting resources of fox news you're listening to Guy Benson and now here's your host Guy Benson It's a new hour on Guy Benson, middle hour of three Tuesday edition. Thank you for tuning in. Guy Benson.com podcast free every day on demand. As we hit the middle hour, let's bring you a Fox News alert and a market update. And it's a big one. The Dow finishing up, 331 points at the closing bell. The Dow ending the day at 52,000 and two points. 5202. And that market update brought to you by Americans for Prosperity. Their mission is based on timeless principles of expanding freedom and opportunity for every American. You can join them. They're a huge grassroots army. I love to work with them. I'll be doing an event with them this coming weekend, actually. Go to Americansforprosperity.org slash guy. You can find out more, see what they're up to for America 250, and find a chapter near you. With that, let's bring in, speaking of prosperity, Steve Moore, co-founder of Unleashed Prosperity. He's an economist. His writing appears all over the place, including at the Wall Street Journal. He's a familiar face on Fox at Stephen Moore on Twitter. Steve, great to have you back. Hello, guys. Great to be with you. All right, so oil coming down, the stock market going up. The market enjoys what it's seeing in terms of the possibility of peace and this deal, obviously. Just from the economic perspective, we spent a lot of it on the security military perspective in the last hour, from the economic side of things, what's your read on this? Well, the market is certainly euphoric over this. We're seeing a huge, huge rise. As you said, I think the oil price last time I checked was down below $74 a barrel, which is a big reduction. And that will mean in a couple weeks people will see relief at the gas pump. So that's very good news. And then, as you said, record high for the S&P 500, the Dow Jay Jones, and the NASDAX. So these are really strong numbers.

What's not the like? I mean, last week we had the biggest IPO in history with, you know, a two trillion dollar company that's publicly traded. Just all systems are go. The jobs report was good. I think the Democrats are going to soon run out of things to complain about. except there is the CPI question. And I saw a clip from Fox 5 in New York where Hakeem Jeffries was just interviewed by Rosanna Scotto. She and I were outnumbered together yesterday. And she pressed him because he was going on about affordability and all of that, price at the pump and all of that. And she said, well, it was worse under Obama and Biden. You had these problems there. And he didn't really, hemmed and Hodd wasn't sure how to. deal with that and it's a completely fair question and point but what the democrats will say is The American people hired the Republicans to fix the problem, and people still feel like there's a lot of squeeze and pain on affordability. And you look at the May CPI number was not great. It was double, more than double the Fed target. And some of that might settle down if this war truly comes to an end. But just pointing back at Biden saying it was worse than, I'm not sure that washes politically. So where does that fit into this larger picture? Because you can point to some really good signs in the economy, and yet it looks like a lot of people aren't feeling it right now. That's exactly right. I mean, so you have really low consumer sentiment numbers, I think, lowest than they've been in a couple of decades. So, by the way, the polls are a little skewed because half of the people just hate Trump and they're against anything that he would do, so they will say anything positive about things. But still, they're not good numbers, and they do. If those numbers hold up a guy, the Republicans are losing a lot of seats in the House and Senate in November. But that's still four or five months away. And we do have, we do have improvement, you know, vast improvement. If this peace deal holds up, you know, nothing's holding us back anymore. And so I think people will start to feel that inflation number will come down for sure because. What caused the inflation number to go up, as you know, was the higher oil prices. Well, guess what if the oil prices come down? Although there is still a problem with food, by the way. Groceries are still expensive. You've got a problem with beef. You know, even the store lately, tried to buy a steak or ground beef. And, you know, it's like twice as much as it used to cost. So look, I understand. People are angry. They don't like to pay higher prices. I don't. My wife doesn't. You don't. So that, but I think that we'll get some relief. There's also the metric of real wages. And you couple that with the Treasury data that we talked about on this show. I think the Republicans have done just almost like a shockingly lousy job, scandalously, like political malpractice type level, bad job of not highlighting the Treasury data on the tax relief. And what we're seeing from the returns this year.

thanks to the big beautiful bill, the working families tax cut, the huge tax increases that were avoided, the additional tax cuts, helping middle class and working class families. The numbers were all out there. They were good. The Republicans, I guess, were busy talking about other things. But when you couple that... With, I know you've been tweeting about this, writing about it, the real wages growing at a pretty nice clip, that is definitely the positive side of this ledger and not a small detail either. It's a really important point you're making, and so we... We have a gauge that we have on unleashed prosperity that we're coming out with these numbers in a few days, but I can have a sneak preview because we have the monthly data on median family income. These are the official census data. And so since Trump came into office in January 2025, median family income, and that's people in the exact middle, the exact middle of the income spectrum, have seen about a $3,100 gain. kind of contradicts the idea of, you know, an affordability crisis because this is after inflation, $3,100 more income. But again, people... That's a lot of money. That's a pretty big number. And by the way, in Trump's first term, it was up $6,000. So... and there was almost no gain under Biden. I know you're making a very good point. You know, you can't always just blame your predecessor. I mean, it's a political time-honored tradition, but people get tired of that. Yeah, I mean, Obama did it for eight years, and yes, he got reelected, but the congressional elections did not go well for him in 10 or 14. So look, I'm here to tell you, I really am feeling very bullish about the U.S. economy right now. We've got great, great companies. You know, I know people have various different opinions about AI, but it's here. I've been talking to a lot of companies. The way AI is increasing their productivity is incredible. And by the way, an increase in productivity. What does that mean, Guy? That means that it costs less to produce things. And when it costs less to produce things, guess what? Prices come down. So I just feel like we're so dominant. You know, nine of the ten top technology companies in the world are based here in the U.S. of A. I mean, it could go on and on with these statistics, but we are really dominating the world economy. Finally, Elon Musk, about a minute here, all this left-wing chatter and appealing to people's envy and just like, oh, well, no one should be allowed to have that much. My trillionaire, that shouldn't be a lot. And I just, I guess my. instinctive responses like, who the hell are you? What do you mean allowed? What have you done? You can see what he has done and built and earned. You might not like it, but I don't understand these people who feel like, oh, it's this moral evil to have someone earn that much money. I just reject that.

Well, this is a guy who's created 5,000 millionaires. And if you read that New York Times story, a lot of them that were just, you know, blue-collar workers went to work for SpaceX and other millionaires. By the way, 90% of the study is so consistently, 90% of the game, when somebody starts a company or invent something, 90% of the gain from that goes to other people, not the owner or the entrepreneur. That means that if he is worth a trillion dollars, that means he's created $9 trillion of wealth. for all the rest of us. That's a pretty good deal. Yeah, the fact that, I mean, the creation of thousands of millionaires, new millionaires, some of whom were blue-collar hourly workers who are now... had their lives changed for themselves and their kids and their grandkids and all of that. I mean, you look at that and say, oh, no, that's not fair. Sorry, I don't buy that for the reasons that you just laid out. Steve Moore, economists here on Guy Benson. Thank you so much, Steve, for all of that analysis. Thank you. When we come back, a terrorism plot thwarted in Washington, D.C. details next. You're listening to a new generation of talk, Guy Benson. I'm Guy Benson. We are back. Thanks for listening. Joining us now is Matt Finn, Fox News National Corresponding. He's in Los Angeles. He's reporting on a very disturbing story on Sunday, Matt. There was this big event at the White House, the UFC fight, lots of hoopla, lots of VIPs in attendance. And there was a plot we are now discovering to not just disrupt that event, but to target people and kill people. And authorities have now unveiled what was prevented, what was thwarted. What are we learning? We are learning that multiple suspects tried to pull off a mass casualty event at the White House. These co-conspirators allegedly wanted to put up a drone on the north lawn of the White House that had some type of explosive that would ignite or explode. And their intent was to scare the hundreds, if not thousands of people at the UFC event. They would come running out of the South Lawn, and that's where snipers would be positioned. who would shoot any number of people. And according to court documents of my sources, these co-conspirators had identified dozens of high-profile people, whether they were members of Congress or elected officials that they wanted to take out at the event. And the alleged attackers are being described as anti-government. They believe that the government has to be taken down. They were particularly upset about...

how the Epstein files were handled, also worried about data centers, sucking up water from communities, very deranged individuals. And, you know, this all comes just a couple weeks after, you know, the alleged assassination of President Trump at the White House Correspondent Center. Now, you know, the White House puts on this big event and there's another thwarted attack guy. Yeah. And so there was that attempt by a... left-wing radical at the White House correspondent's dinner, this was this kind of cell or cabal of young male U.S. citizens scattered across the country that were plotting this, correct? Yes. Okay, so this was not some, to our knowledge yet, foreign enterprise. This was homegrown. I'm seeing that one of the other alleged motives here was taking down American capitalism, that on top of the Epstein stuff, and that's been the source of... I think a wild amount of conspiracy theorizing now for many months. I think something very evil, of course, happened with Epstein. But the allegations and the innuendo and the notion that Donald Trump was the head of the snake on this and was protecting all these pedophiles, I think a lot of that has gotten completely out of control. Also, A-PAC and fighting against the... Jewish lobby seems to be one of the other things at play here. So it feels like a bit of a jumbled mess ideologically, but certainly an ideologically motivated would be attacked. That's at least what I'm reading. Yes, and fortunately, a mother in Ohio, according to the court documents I've reviewed, called police on her son late last week saying that she was concerned that her 19-year-old was talking to people online who she felt like may have been manipulated. She said he had recently purchased guns. and a lot of ammunition. Police showed up and they did recover an AR-15, another rifle, and what they described as thousands of rounds of ammo. This 19-year-old apparently spent its graduation money about $3,000 on these supplies. Camping supplies, bulletproof vests, had all this material to basically cross the country. So this was really coming to fruition. You know, these guys were elaborately plotting this scheme. And thank God that mother called police on her son. Yeah, it's got to be a very difficult thing to do, I would imagine, certainly as a parent, but...

perhaps lives were saved because she did the difficult and right thing. And as we learn more about the motives, which was this toxic blend of ideology and politics and hating American capitalism and Trump and this pedophile cabal and Epstein and APEC, it is very, very disturbing because so much of it is conspiratorial. And unfortunately, a lot of that has been really amplified by a lot of people in a deeply irresponsible. way and those messages are landing with some folks who are then I think getting radicalized and therefore quite demented and in this case trying to murder a bunch of people at the White House they were thank God unsuccessful one other note on this Noah Rothman who I think is a really smart writer at National Review he's got a new book out called Blood and Progress it's about the Really long history now of left-wing political violence in the United States for years leading up to present day. It's unfortunately something that we've talked about and documented here on this show. He is responding to the story that we're talking about here, Matt, saying that the White House terror plot reads a lot like the thwarted New Year's Eve Liberation Front attack on Los Angeles, which would not have been terribly dissimilar from the sophisticated ambush of ICE officials by an Antifa-aligned cell in Texas last year. Noah Rothman. concludes if our media aren't connecting the dots at this point, it's because they do not want to. And I remember that you were at least part of the coverage on that LA plot that got broken up New Year's Eve last year. There was this other Antifa terrorism cell that laid siege to ICE agents. And here's another unrelated but at least ideologically adjacent plot that has been disrupted. This is unfortunately part of a pattern that seems to be growing, and a lot of these radicals seem to be setting aside the jihad problem, young radicalized Americans, homegrown problems. No, absolutely. And the mother in Ohio, I believe it's Danville, Ohio, she said right after that, I think my son has been indoctrinated online. He's all of a sudden acting differently. He quit his job. He's spending his money on all these supplies. Something has dramatically changed to my son to the point I'm actually going to call police. So it goes to show you how quickly someone can be indoctrinated, how quickly they can be brainwashed or activated to respond to these types of groups guy. And you're absolutely right. It is similar to what... was ordered here on New Year's Eve. And all it takes is a couple of young people willing to spend some money. You know, I read through the documents. They were looking for guns. They were looking for ammo. They wanted a drone, of course. That was key to their plot. You know, so it takes some people who have the will and a little bit of money and resources, and this can come together rather quickly. And apparently some desire to try to implement change.

by using violence, which, as we've mentioned just recently in another context, is the textbook definition of terrorism. And the radicalization runs so deep and so much is like profoundly irrational that they are willing to potentially die for this. haze of political causes or at least go to prison for a very long time, which again is a very concerning element to all of this. And back to the mother who decided to alert authorities, again, a very tough call to make. But perhaps in this case, a necessary one, if you're noticing major changes in a loved one in a way that it's disturbing, it can't just simply... be dismissed all the time as oh it might be a phase or it's nothing and thank god this woman decided to speak up when she did or else perhaps this would be a conversation not about something that was broken up by the authorities, but something that we were reacting to as a country in a much more horrible way. Matt Finn, all over this story based in Los Angeles, although these guys apparently were all over the country. Matt Finn, a national correspondent here at Fox News. Matt, thank you very much. Thanks, Guy. Let's stand aside and come right back with more of Guy Benson. Brad Thor, a buddy of mine, very successful novelist, out with a brand new book. Very, very soon, we will talk to him all about it. next. Cheers to America's 250th birthday. Get 20% off your first purchase at Fox Newswineshop.com with code FNRadio 20. 20% discount excludes wine club offers and cannot be combined with any other promotion. Expires July 31st, 2026. Must be 21 order to order. Please drink responsibly.

Guy Benson, sponsored by Previgin. Previgin, made for your brain. Halfway through Guy Benson, thank you, Previgin. On this Tuesday, we're grateful you're listening every day. In fact, Guy Benson.com is our website. Our podcast is free on demand when the show is over. And I'm very happy to welcome back to Guy Benson, our friend Brad Thor, who's a New York Times number one best-selling author of now dozens of thrillers. I read them every year. I look forward to these Harvath novels, a reference to his protagonist, Scott Harvath, every summer. And the 25th book in the Harvath series is now out today. And Brad was kind enough to give me an advanced copy. I blew through it. I read it last week and enjoyed it immensely, as always. Brad, congratulations. Welcome back to the show. Well, thank you, Guy, and thanks for having me back on the show. You bet. So the brand new book is entitled Choke Point, and it features, as I mentioned, Scott Harvath. Your fans know him well, but there are probably some potential new fans out there who may not be familiar with you, as we have this growing, expanding audience. So if you would, introduce yourself to the audience or reintroduce and tell people about Scott Harvath and the way that you build these novels. Oh, wow. How much time do we have? It's, so you and I have known each other for many years. We know each other from Chicago, which is where I grew up, and I live in Nashville. And, boy, I've been at the thriller writer game, thriller writing games, since shortly after 9-11. My first book came out. It's called Lions of Lucerne many, many years ago. And now I've got chokepoint that's out in Harvath to explain him. pretty quickly. Hartvath was a very accomplished Navy SEAL who did some impressive stuff while working with the Secret Service. They recruited him to come to the White House and help bolster their counterterrorism expertise. And subsequent president said, this guy's too good to have sitting here playing defense. We've got to take the chain off and let him run and put him on offense. And we're going to kind of look the other way. No rulebook for him. But they realized that they couldn't send a sadist out into the world to do some of America's most dangerous business without a rulebook. They needed somebody who had a strong moral compass, and that's Harvard. So he's now in a position where an administration thinks the CIA needs to be completely cleaned out, and there's still a lot of dangerous work that needs to be done. So it's getting farmed out to this very kind of quiet private group in northern Virginia that are picking up some of the slack for the CIA while they focus inward. And that's where he is right now in this series, now 25 books in. And I did, in fact, start with the first book, Lions of Lucerne. I love it. I recommend it if people are wanting to learn about the Bradthor experience.

I just think starting at the beginning, at least with that book, and then you can bop around and hop around. It's fine. They are all stand-alone thrillers as well. I just like that first one very much to set the tone and then sort of like, you know, enjoy the rest of the way you can do it however you want. But for our purposes, maybe you start with lines of Lucerne or you go straight to choke point after that, or you just start with choke points since it is out today. Tell us about this book. Set the scene. Absolutely. And as you and I have talked about in the past, my books are like the James Bond movies. If you've never seen a Bond movie and one is playing in your local theater, you can go see it. You'll get caught up right away. You don't have to go right to the beginning of the canon. So with Choke Point, my idea for Choke Point was I've been fascinated in real life with the Chinese and how they wield soft power through something called their Belt and Road Initiative, where they identify infrastructure projects in different countries. And they say, we'll come in, we'll finance it, we'll bring the experts in, whether it's to redempt your port system, your highway system, your rail system. And it's basically the Chinese getting that kind of proverbial camel's nose into the tent because once the Chinese have got their claws new, they never let go. And they start to exert influence over these countries. And I asked myself as a thriller author, has a country ever said no to China? And there is one, Thailand, who's a big American ally. I was fascinated to learn how much we have going with Thailand. And I thought, oh, this is very interesting. Thailand has had a lot of military coups, the last one being 2013, 2014. What if Thailand, which they did in real life, they told the Chinese to go pound sand, they weren't interested in being on the hook for a project with the Chinese. And what if the Chinese decided, okay, well, that's the civilian government. We know Thailand's very unstable, and we're going to come in and push them over the edge. We'll get a military government in there, and we can work with them. And what if in the process they killed a lot of American tourists who were visiting Phukets, Bangkok, things like that? I said, what might the U.S. do in that kind of situation? If it's an elite Chinese intel unit that's behind all this in Thailand, what kind of people might they send over? And I said, I think they'd send Scott Harvath to settle score. And that's what showpoint's all about. Yeah, and it starts. quite literally with a bang, and then it's off to the races, and it's engrossing, and I just devoured the book, as I always do. One thing that I'm always impressed with, Brad, is some of the granular detail that you get into. And some of this story, like one of the plot lines, is based in the D.C. area, but as you said, much of it is in Southeast Asia. And you go back, and I know that you have all sorts of sources that you're plugged into in the intelligence world, in the special operations worlds, because you want to get the little detail. right, especially for guys and gals who might be...

In that universe, if they're going to read your book, you don't want them rolling their eyes about like, oh, this guy's getting things wrong where it's now taking me out of sort of this suspended disbelief but realism. So you want to get those details right. When it comes to setting these books far afield and all around the globe and you're like, all right, it's going to be Thailand, I want to have the color commentary correct. I want to get sort of the vivid descriptions. to resonate with people who've spent a lot of time in Thailand. Talk about that process of making sure that it's believable, even if it's fiction. Well, so you're 100% correct. My number one goal is to not push you out of that suspension of disbelief. I have a term. I don't want you to bump, like hitting a speed bump in your mind when you're reading one of my thrillers. Nothing drives me crazier than if I'm reading a thriller and somebody's got a manual safety on a Glock, things like that, and I'll throw the book to the other side of the room because it's such a simple thing to find and know that that's not the right way to describe a Glock. I like to talk to people who have operated in the areas that I write about it, particularly people whose job required that they pay attention to the smallest of details. So whether these are people that maybe worked at the CIA station in Bangkok, whether it was people who were Knox, who were not in the embassy, special operations personnel, people in the diplomatic corps, these are people who are trained to pay attention to things. And what I find is that the networks are pretty tight, pretty small. I'll spend a lot of time in D.C. And I'll talk to people and I say, hey, you know, I heard you had somebody that was over in Bangkok. Now they're back at the State Department. I'd love to take them for a coffee. Could you introduce me? And so like any other job to be successful, you need a good network. And I'm fortunate enough to have that for my books. And I think that those details are the bedrock of a good thriller. So it's important for me that it's like your homework, right? It's your process, your homework. Because if you don't do it and you take the shortcuts, readers. are going to know. Maybe not every reader, but some readers who know better are going to bump, as you say. And you're avoiding that while in the process, Brad, of pursuing this almost hybrid genre that you've talked about before on the show. You call it faction. Describe for the uninitiated faction and how that mentality, that mindset played into chokepoint, your latest thriller out today. Right. So I liken what I do to, I own an amusement park. And every summer, I open a brand new roller coaster. And I can't wait for you to get into the park and try that new roller coaster. And you're going to go, man, that was the best one ever. Or if you're Guy Benson, you're going to go, I like the original roller coaster. That'll always be my favorite. Go ride that one first. So my job is to give you a white knuckle thrill ride. What I do, what I think differentiates me from other writers in my genre is that I have a really strong geopolitical backdrop with each book, something that's really happening in the world or about to happen in the world. And so what I call faction is when you're reading my books,

You don't know where the facts end and the fiction begins. In fact, lots of people tell me they love to read my books with their laptop open or the phone nearby so that they can actually search stuff. They'll read something go, there's no way that's true. And then the... Yeah, I've done that, by the way, I've absolutely done that. In fact, it has driven me crazy. One of the hazards of reading your book at the beach, which I almost always do. This pub date was a little earlier. Often it's... next month, so I will read the advanced copy at a beach and sometimes get looks or even questions from people, fans, being like, how did you get that? It's not out yet. But one of the problems that I run into reading your book at the beach, which I did not this time, is the beach that we go to doesn't have cell service. So I can't look this stuff up, so I actually mark it sometimes with a pen and go back and look it up later. That is absolutely a true story. Well, and that's a lot of people like that about my books. Listen, these, as you know, Guy, they're short, very crisp, like three-page cinematic chapters. You feel really accomplished because you can bang out a lot of chapters in one-fitting and everything. And so my job is to entertain you. That's my job as an author. But if you close a Brad Thor thriller, a little bit smarter, a little bit better informed as to why America needs to be paying attention to these places in the world. Then I've done my job as a citizen. That's the value add with reading a Brad Thor book as you're smarter at the end of it. Last question. It's sort of a twofer. You've got your Scott Harvath character who is this intense, ethical, but also when necessary, brutal patriot. He's this tip of the spear operating black a lot of the time, defending America, who has this deep sense of America and our righteousness and all of that. You also don't necessarily shy away from villains who are Americans as well, who have gone astray. And in this case, chokepoint, the overall threat is China and we won't get too deep into that but you've already let that cat out of the bag it's not a huge state secret here but there are some really bad people in the course of this novel and not just this one who are Americans talk about having an American hero and villain when you're writing a book like this and then perhaps relatedly Did you put any extra thought or was there any, I don't know, added layer to your creative process this year knowing the book was coming out so close to the 250th birthday of this country? Was that lurking in your mind as an author? It's a great question. I'll start with that one first. So actually, my big Fourth of July thriller was last summer's book, Edge of Honor. And Edge of Honor happens in the D.C., northern Virginia area in the run-up to the Fourth of July. So if you're looking for a Fourth of July thriller, that's last summer's book, Edge of Honor. With this one, it's my 25th Harvath, and I really wanted to make it special. So I bring back a character from the second book.

It's a little bit of a surprise. It's an Easter egg. So way, way back, this character makes an appearance. I think long-time readers are going to love that. It doesn't matter if you're a brand-new reader, you're still going to enjoy this character. And I think that with this book, my old... It's a pretty major character this time, right? Just to make that clear. It's not a quick cameo. No, no, no, he rolls deep with Harvest through the whole book. So with this book, with this book, I really do, listen, I picked Choke Point as the title a year ago. Before I ever even had any inkling, we were going to have trouble with the Strait of Hormuz. And so this deals with a choke point on the other side of the world. And I actually think what's happening in Choke Point is going to play out in the very near future in the next year or so. And so that was the big driving force for this book because I wanted to get it to market before these things actually happened in the real world. I think that is fair, and you can figure out maybe who that character is. The deep fans will love the throwback, and this is all coming together just weeks before America's 250th. I guess like 25s, twos and fives are wild here, because it's the 25th Scott Harvath novel in this series by our friend Brad Thor. This is sure to be a giant bestseller and hit they always are, and I enjoyed it very much. As usual, Brad, congratulations again. What an achievement, and I'm sure we'll talk again soon. Good luck with the book tour. Thank you, my friend, and happy Father's Day to you and to all the fathers in the audience. What a great idea for a Father's Day gift, as a matter of fact. That would be choke point, a thriller by Brad Thor available everywhere. Brad, again, thank you so much, and we will be right back. America is listening to Guy Benson.

to the man that I call the only journalist in Virginia, Nick Minnock, and he sat down with Lucas, and she is still on a rampage coming after her own party's governor, referring to Abigail Spanberger, among other things, as a diva, cut 32. You know, I just happened to be sitting up on the 13th floor, and all of a sudden I got this epiphany. And I said, Dana said, she's a diva. And this kind of came to mind. And that's how Data Center diva came about. And Amazon done too for the speaker. Calling her a diva and then saying that. She's such a diva that she doesn't really do the work. And in fact, this Democratic leader has a worse relationship on a working basis than she did with Glenn Youngkin, who was Abigail Spanberger's predecessor, the conservative Republican, cut 34. Do you think your relationship with Governor Glenn Youngkin was better or worse than your relationship with Governor Abigail Spanberger? It was no worse for sure. Well, at least he would call me in the phone and talked to me. Governor Glenn Youngkin or at least call you? Oh, yeah, he would. Governor Abigail Spanberger won't? I'm not offered, no. And I think some of that's partly my fault, but anyway. Very interesting. She is... publicly taking more shots at Abigail Spanberger. And by the way, the Democrats are currently in Virginia at an impasse over the budget. They control everything. They won their blue wave in 2025. And here in 26, you might get a government shutdown in Virginia because they're fighting amongst themselves. Congratulations to the voters in empowering these people. It couldn't happen to a nicer group. And with that, We'll step aside and turn to our final hour of Guy Benson coming up next. The former acting director of ICE is here to react to a bunch of stories on the immigration enforcement front. That's straight ahead.

Raise your glass to Guy Benson Happy Hour. Brought to you by the Finnish Long Drink. Finland's most popular alcoholic beverage is taking America by storm. Visit thelongdrink.com. And now, here's Guy Benson. hour here on Guy Benson on this Tuesday. Thank you so much for being with us. Guy Benson.com is our online home. Podcast is free every day on demand when the program ends in just about an hour. This radio hour is sponsored by the Finnish long drink, which we recommend highly if you are 21 years of age or older, and please always drink responsibly. Great sponsor, great friend, great product, the longdrink.com for more information there. Well, joining us now from our D.C. Bureau and the Tony Snow Studios is Jonathan Fahey, former acting director of ICE and former federal prosecutor. Great to have you back. Great to be here. So earlier today, Vice President JD Vance was on the view. And as you can imagine, he was peppered with hostile questions throughout his entire interview, basically, start to finish. They were coming after him. And I think generally, as he tends to do, he was quite successful in keeping a smile on his face. artfully responding under fire to these media figures who can't stand him. And that is one of his calling cards, one of the things he's very good at. And he excelled, I think, a number of times throughout this sort of bombardment that he withstood. And one of the questions that came to him was this allegation that he and therefore the administration more broadly and talking about immigration policy don't really care about children and families and all those disruptions. And he sort of jiu-jitsued it. aptly noting that women and children and girls in particular go through hell when they are brought illegally to the United States, when you talk about incidents of sexual assault and other forms of abuse and trafficking, human trafficking, and that scourge. And he also talked about the many children who were effectively lost during the border crisis. under the Biden administration, releasing the country and lost track of by the relevant agencies like HHS. Even the New York Times has reported about that. And he was saying, we are working hard to find those kids. And they found quite a lot of them, tens of thousands, if I'm not mistaken. And he said, we're also closing the border and putting an end to these horrors that befall a lot of the women and girls. Why isn't that part of the conversation in the premise of the question? And I'm paraphrasing the way that he came back at them. But I think that's a really...

Excellent point to raise, Jonathan. And you know this firsthand. There are so many terrible, awful, inhumane knock-on effects of illegal immigration. And many of the supporters or defenders or at least apologists for illegal immigration never seem to want to grapple with those realities when they're making, I think, cheap political points about kids and families. Yeah, exactly. They don't really care about kids or families. They care about massive... migration, massive illegal immigration. But you're exactly right. And I'm glad the vice president pushed back. And it wasn't interesting. The clips I saw how he's very skillful disarming them. But, you know, when you're talking about the people coming across the border, these were not people that just happen to walk up to the border and go across. These were people that were paying coyotes, which are, it's a slang for the people that help, you know, get people across the border, you know, through Mexico all the way to the border. And they are part of cartel networks, human trafficking networks. And the percentages of, Young girls that get raped during this process is astronomical. I don't remember the exact numbers, but I think it's well north of 50%. So they are subjecting girls to being raped to all sorts of other things, to being sold and sometimes in sexual slavery. And there's really no humane defense of this other than if the defense is, yeah, it's really bad getting here, but once they get here, it's better for them. And maybe that's... true but it does it i don't think the democrats really care about the human aspect of this because it's also not true for the trafficking victims oh exactly life could get better for some of them even if they don't have a right to be here but that's not true for people who are victimized by this cartel operation north of the border where there's sexual slavery and other forms of basically indentured servitude and some of those stories are really harrowing and upsetting and i think look you are right to say And I want to be fair, you're right to say that the politicians, a lot of the activists and hardcore politicians, don't actually care about women and children. They like to tug at heartstrings and take the most sympathetic examples and try to use that as a cudgel against enforcement and basically try to make it seem like, oh, all this enforcement is cruel and mean spirited, and we should be better than that as a country. And that type of messaging can work at least somewhat on a lot of the American people because we are a compassionate group of people. that we don't want anyone to be suffering or hurt. But I think your average run-of-the-mill left-leaning person who might vote for the Democrats, they might, at least on some level, care about these conditions and about these girls. And I think it's important when you're communicating to those people, not the hardcore elected officials and activists, but to the persuadable people, because there are emotionally intense components of this debate, I think raising... Those concerns and telling those stories is really, really important to inject that into the conversation, that type of subject matter, which is exactly what JD Vance did, because it kind of diffuses the emotional impact that they're trying to use only in one direction by introducing a very important and significant other side of the story.

Yeah, I think that's an important point you made, that it's, it isn't just a one-sided story, and it's a human, I mean, the whole thing is a human tragedy, and so many people are exploited for whatever reason, whether I was political, financial, whatever, and harmed in immeasurable ways. And I totally agree with you. Some of them, when they get here, the harm just continues or even gets worse. And I do think it is fair to push back on that because, you know, because my point is really the politicians are doing this out of cynicism, not that everyone. everyone that cares about it necessarily doesn't care about it. And I think the politicians on the Democrat side are effective in doing that. And I think it is good to push back on that and then push back on the big picture, which is, you know, you have people, you know, we always talk about, you know, Lake and Riley and Sheridan Gorman, but these are preventable murders of American citizens. And the core, you know, responsibility of our elected officials is to protect the interest of American citizens, not. illegal immigrants or anyone else, it's American citizens come first. And the Democrats can never, and they couldn't say it at Trump's State of the Union, but they really can't even credibly say it. And I think that's sort of the core issue is like, even if this illegal immigration is good for illegal immigrants, the question is, is it good for Americans? And I think, you know, if you're at all serious about it, by and large, it's harmful to Americans. If you look at crime, you look at housing, you look at medical care, you look at education. All of us, I shouldn't say all of us, but as a country we suffer, and you have the people, the Democrats, you know, the liberals with the signs in their front yard, and they're more than willing to impose massive costs on other people, and then they, ironically, get all the virtue credit out of it when they never have to suffer the cost. It's a real cynical thing, but it seems like the Democrats really, they love being in that world of acting like they're helping people, but never having to, you know, bear the consequences and also get the benefit of Donald Trump's, you know, hard. harder, tougher position on the border, so they get the safety of Donald Trump and also get to be a critic. It's kind of a nice world for them to live in. Yeah, they benefit from the policy while they criticize it. And they... play these emotional games, and I think part of combating that is appealing not just to reason with stats and figures, but to emotion as well, which is exactly what JD Vance did, and it is legitimate. It is a big, big part of that story. I do want to ask you, we know that ICE was funded for a strong period of time under last years, last summer's so-called one big beautiful bill, the working families tax cut. I think the Republicans understood, and this was press in of them, that the Democrats might play games with it. So they preempted that by giving lots of funding to ICE back last year. But given... The DHS shutdown of two and a half months and the Democrats really digging in as an anti-enforcement party to the point of government shutdowns and not caring about the long TSA lines and the list goes on. There were several jihadist attacks on the homeland during that shutdown. Democrats didn't budge, didn't move an inch. They have now passed.

for the next roughly three years, additional funding for ICE and for Border Patrol that Democrats would not go along with. They used reconciliation to do it, this party line mechanism and maneuver that was available to them. And that's $70 billion that will last through the end of Trump's term. Now, what happens after that and who's in charge and how that plays out is a concern that I have, but at least until 2029. These immigration enforcement agencies, one of which you led, will be flushed with cash to carry out operations. Just give us a sense, obviously not all 70 billion will be going directly to ICE. It will be going elsewhere, including CBP, but give us a sense of a fully funded ICE with all this additional money, what that does operationally for... an organization like ICE, what it does for morale, what it does to empower ICE to do its job and particularly the priority of removing the worst of the worst from this country. Well, I think the most important thing that it does with the funding is you're funding more people to be able to go out there and do the job. Because as you know, and we talk a lot about like sanctuary cities and places like that, when you are trying to get the worst or the worst and you're also fighting against local politicians to do so, you need manpower. So they will have more manpower for places like New York City or, you know, Fairfax County, Virginia, other places that the local, you know, the local jurisdictions or the state or whatever are fighting against them. So they will be able to. as Tom Homan always talks about flooding the zone, but more people out there getting the worst of the worst. The thing that I think this also helps with, and we really saw under, you know, under Kristi Noem as well, is we have the massive number of self-deportations. I think it was over two million. And this. policy of paying people, what, $2,600 or so to self-deport. I think, I hope they really keep emphasizing that because that's sort of a, one, it's painless in many respects, but it's also inherently, you know, compassionate, more than compassionate to the illegal aliens, they get to go with the money in their pocket. And it also frees up. If you've got, let's say, generally otherwise law abiding illegal immigrants who don't have a right to be here and they decide to take that money and repatriate and maybe they can start the legal immigration process. at some point down the line, that also frees up resources and manpower to really focus on the bad guys, on the criminal aliens. That's exactly right because you think about if you have to go arrest a bad guy and you can't arrest him in a jail like in New York or one of these places, you have to go out to their neighborhood. You're talking teams of people. Plus you arrest them, you process them. You have to go through immigration proceedings. Yeah, versus somebody taking a check of $2,600. You're not only saving the taxpayers money. You're saving risk on agents, risk on the community. And also it's easier for the people leaving. They get to get their affairs in order and get out in a way that's, you know,

I would say probably a preferable way given if it's one or two options. So I think that is really, you know, hopefully that will continue to ramp up because you can easily get to the number of over 3 million people a year being deported. Really not that hard when you have the actual deportations on arrest plus the self deportations. But you asked about morale, and I think that is so important too. And morale has been really good comparatively to Mayorkas is DHS, which... It's not really a fair comparison because it was just so bad. I mean, the... I don't say literally everyone, but he was not respected and he was he was reviled by people within DHS because he degraded the agency in them. So morale's being good, but this really strengthensens their morale because can you imagine in this world or some people can, but to any given day, all of a sudden you're not getting a paycheck and all your bills keep coming in and that's a lot of stress to carry. And I was with the government during some of the shutdown, so I, you know, understand it. So these people know. that, hey, they've got a runway where they can have a predictable life. And if your life is not crazy on the outside, you're able to focus on your work at a higher level. And you've also got an administration, unlike the last one, that has your back and wants you to succeed and is giving you the tools that you need to do that. Before I let you go very quickly, you mentioned New York City. You mentioned Northern Virginia. I just want to note for the audience that the Trump Justice Department has filed a lawsuit against the Commonwealth of Virginia, specifically against the AG, Jay Jones. and also that Fairfax County Commonwealth's attorney, Steve Descano, the pro-cime, pro-illegal immigrant, so-called prosecutor there, challenging some of these policies on sanctuary and the like. And then in New York City, you have the left-wing mayor, Zohran Mamdani going after the Trump administration about ICE personnel in that city, saying it would, quote, ruin the spirit of the World Cup. I think the World Cup tourists are here legally, which is a key distinction here. The DHS secretary, Markwayne Mullin. Mullen responding to Zohran Mamdani in Cut 27. Zohran Mamdani is a socialist communist communist that I have zero respect for. He's running a great city by allowing lawlessness activity to continue to run rampant on his streets. President Trump ran on the fact that he's going to restore law back in America's cities, even in these sanctuary cities. And I've said this multiple times. I don't care if it's a red state or blue state, we're going to protect the homeland. And what happens in these sanctuary cities like what Zohran Mamdani is running is that the criminals go to the safe haven in New York City, but they disperse through. throughout other parts of the state and other parts of the country and continue this criminal activity. So we're going to go where the heart of the crime is. Very quickly, Jonathan, your reaction to that.

He's exactly right. And ironically, Zohran Mamdani is bringing in more ice agents. And I think he wants it. I think he wants conflict, so it elevates his status. And, you know, Markwayne Mullin is exactly right. You know, we need to get rid of the criminals. And this has nothing to do with the World Cup. It's not going to affect that whatsoever, which is just utter nonsense. And New York is a great city despite Zohran Mamdani. And again, he's another one that's... benefiting for Donald Trump's tough immigration practices. Because remember, real quick, under Mayor Adams, under Biden, he was asking for $12 billion. Adams was from the administration because they couldn't afford all the illegal aliens. So now they kept taking them in, right? And so they wanted this bailout. And now they're not coming because the border's closed. So Zohran Mamdani has a lot more sort of wiggle room to posture in the political sense. That is a really good point to make. Jonathan Fahey, former acting director of ICE. and a former federal prosecutor here on Guy Benson. Jonathan, thanks so much. Thank you. Oh, and by the way, one additional note on this front, breaking news. The Justice Department has now charged 15 anti-ice agitators. in Minnesota from those riots and those violent clashes. And hopefully that's just the tip of the iceberg. But that is a development we wanted to bring to you late breaking. With that, we'll stand aside. Take a very quick break. More of Guy Benson happy hour after this. Always fresh. Always fair. Guy Benson.

We're back here on Guy Benson. I saw there was a press release from Governor Gavin Newsom, blaming oil companies and gasoline companies for their branded gasoline, leading to higher prices. That's the latest excuse that he's trying to lay at the feet of someone else when the reality is the reason gas is so expensive, far more in California than most of the rest of the country, is because of taxes and regulations and fees imposed by the government of California. Based on the data that I've seen, and it's all documented, every gallon of gasoline in California has between a buck and a buck 50 of those taxes and fees built into it. That's policy. That's the government's fault. This scapegoating is so pathetic and lazy. And by the way, on this front, comfortably smug from the ruthless podcast, he had a funny point. He noted that Gavin Newsom. has attacked now branded gasoline. At the same time, his wine company is selling, for instance, an 876 bottle of wine. It's branded. It's called Plumpjack. So he loves that brand and charging a lot more for that wine compared to, you know, the average bottle of wine that you might pick up at the liquor store or the grocery store because of the brand that's slapped on it. He's not selling empty bottles with no logo. He doesn't really have a problem with brands. He has a political problem, and he wants to blame Storm and share that around to everyone other than the truest culprit here, which is the government he leads in California. It is shameless, but that's Gavin Newsom. So both a quick policy lesson and yet another study in hypocrisy there that we wanted to bring to you on Guy Benson, and we'll be right back.

Talking about the issues you care about, Guy Benson. In our first hour today, we welcome back to the show, Brigadier General John Teichert, retired of the U.S. Air Force, talking about the Iran situation, the latest rumors and speculation, the implications for the military and beyond. Here's part of that discussion with Brigadier General Tyker. I'm a little... anxious here about how this might play out because it seems as though there are some weasel words being used about the Iranians getting access to money, which would be a lifeline, to this awful regime. not necessarily American dollars, but maybe from some coalition of other countries that are kind of part of this or party to it, where there would be at least some early carrots for the regime, and maybe not as many sticks that they're worried about in terms of noncompliance. I know they want money down the line and sanctions relief. The administration keeps saying none of that's going to happen in any sort of American official capacity until they have demonstrated with X, Y, and Z that they're doing their part of the deal. But. Based on the leaks, at least, it looks like the key question of all of this, the really driving force behind last summer's bombings and this year's war, this nuclear program, I mean, there are scant details at all. And they're telling us that Iran is going to let us take out the nuclear dust. We're getting kind of a... A very difficult to digest evolving nebulous answer on whether or not the whole program will get demolished and dismantled or not. Am I reading too much into this with concern, or are you seeing some ripples out there that might be harbingers in your mind? Guy, I think I'm absorbing this in the same way as you are. And I'm an eternal optimist. And I have a glimmer of hope here, but I have a healthy dose of skepticism because we're dealing with Iran who's had malign intent and activity for the last 47 years. And maybe most importantly, 10 weeks ago when we entered into the current ceasefire. There was one and only one precondition on them, and that was opening up the straight, no strings attached, and that never came to fruition. They didn't do it. Nope, they didn't. So I'm worried that we're marching down that same path. Now, I think there's three different things we can do to mitigate that risk or to make sure this is a good deal, and we've got to hold the administration accountable to all three. Number one, that we've got to make sure, as the vice president promised.

that this is a performance-based plan. That means that Iran does not get any of the major benefits of the deal until they demonstrate major compliance to the deal. And by the way, can I just jump in before you get to two and three? He, I think, JD Vance, is sort of playing some rhetorical games where he's saying there's not a dime of American money that would flow to them unless they've hit those benchmarks. But to me... You have to look at the totality of the deal with a holistic view of the universe of money that could flow to them. I don't care if it is technically our money or if it's some other country that's been read into this and helping us and doing our bidding in some way. If Iran's coffers are filling up in any way, that's a benefit to them, and that should not happen until they are actually... proving the good faith and the results on their end. And I feel like just playing, you know, parsing it out and saying, oh, it's only American money. I think, I hope that that's not an evasion here, but my antenna's up on that. Because the Obama people played the same games. Yep. No, and I agree with you. And it actually leads to number two, which is what does it cost us? And I don't mean out of American coffers. I mean, how much are we enabling the Iranian regime to rebuild and reconstitute so we're just entering or starting the next cycle of their malign activity? And we can't be giving them too much because, frankly, they've been on the ropes for the last 10 weeks. We were on the verge of decisive military activity 10 weeks ago. We gave them a lifeline, and I fear that anything that we give them as a part of this deal has to be judged not just against the short-term standard of what does it do today, but how does it enable that regime and their malign intent down the road? And that's number two. And the number three, and I think this is the biggest mitigating factor here, Guy. We've got to hold the administration accountable. And that is how is the administration and this deal holding Iran accountable? And I firmly believe that if we see any backsliding or delays or bad faith, then the administration has to not only say, but follow through with an end to the deal. and the resumption of decisive military activity, because otherwise Iran's just going to keep playing the game they are so well known for. My full interview with John Tyker, retired Brigadier General in the U.S. Air Force, available online at Guy Benson.com. It's part of the free podcast every day on-demand, no charge at all. That's Guy Benson's show.com or Fox Newspodcast.com or wherever you get your podcasts. When we come back to Homestratch, producer Christine, apparently there's another story. that we didn't get to yesterday. It was hinted at. It was previewed. It was teased. I don't know what the punchline is, but we'll find out together coming up. Same issues, but with a fresh perspective. Guy Benson.

Now it's time for your favorite segment of the day. Home Stretch. It's basically the only segment I'm on. So I've declared it the audience's favorite segment. Guy Benson. Home Stretch on Guy Benson. It's Tuesday here on the program. We're so grateful that you're listening. Guy Benson.com is our online home. Podcast free every day. Well, yesterday I mentioned a little mishap with producer Christine when she brought me some water on a recent show in New York. Yesterday, so just back up for a second, we had talked about one of our home stretch subjects last week was my confession that I have become relatively late in life in my 40s a coffee person, a coffee drinker. And that was not the case. I almost never drank coffee. And now there's certain beverages that I've come to enjoy in recent months. And we bought this espresso machine for the house that was expensive. But Adam really wanted it. And I've just decided that as part of my routine now, especially in the morning. And I am just coming to grips with the fact that this is a change in my own life. Yesterday, I had a pretty long... stint in New York for a number of reasons did a bunch of TV, always very grateful for those opportunities and that platform, but worked throughout the entire weekend, and then all of a sudden, you know, you do all that work, and then it's Monday, and you feel like, wow, there really wasn't a weekend, and I was dragging a little bit as we were heading into the show yesterday afternoon, after outnumbered, and before we went live. And so I had not had coffee yet. on a Monday. And so I asked Christine, would you mind running out to a well-known coffee chain? Here's my credit card. Feel free to grab something for yourself and for Joelle. But I would love a skim iced latte, please. And she was more than happy to do it, and she did, in fact, bring back coffee for everyone. And Christine, would you like to share with the class part of your adventure? getting those beverages. Which part? Well, the part where you did not write down my order, just like you did not write down orders when you were briefly a waitress in your youth and got fired because you got so many things wrong. And I guess that lesson had not been learned. And so I thought it was like a three-word order. So maybe it would stick. Iced or skim iced latte. And you committed that to memory, sort of. And then what happened? Then I turned around and looked at you when you said skimmed iced latte and I said to you. Like immediately. What kind of milk do you want? You said regular milk, right? And I said skim.

Ice latte. You're like, oh, right. Oh, yes. Skim. So that did not infuse me with a great deal of confidence. And then I was doing some other show prep and a text message came in. A few minutes later. And what was the text message? All it said was iced question mark. So you asked for a skim ice latte. And I think I was just double checking to make sure that I had that order right in my little noggin. I just thought it was so funny that it took multiple clarifications, and you immediately went to the wrong thing. on the milk. You defaulted to regular milk. I was like, I just said skim. Then the text comes in on ice. Am I remembering correctly that you were fired from a waitress job because you tried to wing it? Well, can I just explain myself here? Sure. I buy a coffee every day and I always, whenever they say regular milk, right? I always change that to almond milk. So I think just in my mind, I'm constantly questioning if I get somebody else's coffee for them, do you need me to switch to almond milk? Because I don't really. because of that diet, actually. I really don't have much dairy anymore in my diet. So I think that was always in the back of my mind. So when I said regular milk, I didn't, I wasn't talking about skim. I was talking about like, you know, non-dairy. Did I, does that make sense, Dylan? It does except you were going to, you were going to forget the skim part. You'd have been like, regular milk. Yes, probably. And then I kind of remembered that you said iced because then I also thought, God, it's such a beautiful hot day out. Why would he ask? It was a three-word order. Skim iced latte. I was worried I was going to come back with like a full fat milk hot cappuccino. Well, see, I was worried about that as well, hence the clarifications. Aren't you happy that your producer? wanted clarification. I prefer that, but also you could have simply written it down, which, and I dodge my question, do I remember from a previous home stretch that you were a waitress for a hot minute way back in the day? Was it like at a diner in the 50s? Was it a drive-in? No, it was an Italian restaurant. Oh, boy. And it was not, what's the one you say I always love? Olive Garden. Oh, yeah, no, it was not the Olive Garden. I don't know if I've ever been. I think I went to, I think, oh, you know what, you know what? I don't think they had those in your youth. Guy. You know what? Actually, I had a first date at an Olive Garden, and I remember thinking, this is where he's going to take me. I'm not so sure the rest of the dates are going to be great. He turned to have to be really nice. Anyway, I digress. Was his name Bobby? No, no, no, no. Okay, so it didn't work out. It didn't work out. Well, he was nice until I just, I was bored. It happened a lot. Oh, you, you dumped him.

Oh, yeah, that happened a lot. And here we have. Happened a lot. Once again, wandered off of the path here. Yes. Of the waitress story. Okay, fine, yes. Okay, so, and this was so bad because I was helping a friend out. My best friend was going to Norway for the summer. So I offered to take over her waitressing job that I got fired from. Did she therefore get fired? No, but I remember her going after that. I remember her just working on Sundays going forward. So I wonder if they were questioning her judgment for allowing me. For recommending you? For recommending me? Because you would what, just like flirt with the customers be like, all right, hon, and not write a thing down and everything was wrong? Yeah, like there was always like your regulars because there was like a smaller restaurant. So either. I'm picturing you like chomping on gum and having a pencil in your ear. never using it. But do you think I had like a beehive hairdo? Like they call me flow. Can I help you, honey? You think that's what I said to them when I went up to the table? Yeah, which is different than your evening moonlighting as a lounge singer, of course. I could have signed it. I really would have gotten fired. No, but you know what happened is I just chatted a lot with the customers and then I totally would forget their orders. You know what though? The owner, he was like, He was an older man. Oh, don't blame this on him or his age. He didn't have a lot of patience. And he was like straight from Italy. And I don't think he got the appeal of me at all. Like I feel like he just didn't. That's a recurring theme in your life. People not getting the appeal of cookie, which brings us to something that. Was mentioned yesterday by Dylan and by you, and I have no idea what it is. It just says here on my rundown, cookies calendar. And I want to know, or do I, do I really want to know what does this mean? Yeah. So, okay, so as the audience knows, Guy is soon to be welcoming a new member to his family. And that comes with a lot of planning on the show side of things for hosts, for paternity, and all of those things. And so Cookie texted me a picture of what we had planned. She was like, let me send you the calendar. And what she sent me was a hand-drawn calendar with pencil. Everything was penciled in. And there was lots of erase marks everywhere all over the calendar. Like very clearly you could tell she had written something. And she asked me, she said, you know, is there some sort of program or a computer thing that would let me like put a calendar? in the computer and maybe print it off. Wait, wait, hang on. So this was a hand-drawn, penciled-in calendar. Did she take a photo of it and send it to you? I didn't even, like, print out an empty calendar. Joel, do you remember when I was asking you for a ruler a couple weeks? Yes, I sketched out. I made my own calendar. What? Justin used to make fun. Justin and Dan, we were like, I used to do this a lot, especially when you were off.

And I had to fill in things. Like Justin's like, uh-oh, here comes the hand-drawn calendar. You wouldn't even print it. And then you're taking photos. Did you send it with a like a dove? Like, send it to Dylan, fly. Carrier pigeon. I think it's awesome that I also had to go. I define a number two pencil. It's not easy to find anymore in the office. Well, it used to be right in your ear when you were a waitress. And then I had to actually ask the big boss because he was walking down the hallway. I was like, do we have a pencil sharpener anywhere? Because the pencil wasn't sharpened. You used his time for that question? He brought me over. Oh, my goodness. And so here's the thing, Dylan. Did you let her know? Are you going to let our investigative reporter, Christine, blow the cover off of a story that now there are computerized virtual calendars that can even be shared between smartphones? That might be something Christine can discover and bring to this audience for the first time. Oh, I've never been able to do that. Dylan, have I ever shared the calendar with you? Not once. I've tried. I've sent a calendar invite to me. And it always ends up with her trying to send me something. And she's like, can you just do it? Can you just do it and send it to so-and-so? And that's what happens. I also told her that you can make calendars also in Microsoft Excel, which has existed since 1985. Oh, no, no, no. She was at least 30 when that came out. So you'd think that she would have plenty of time to learn. No, I had a job. You can even just print out a blank calendar. I think I wound up doing that because I had so many eraser marks on my first calendar. I actually think I finally printed a plain one. But then there's so many eraser marks in that. But that Excel thing you're talking about, I had a job once where I had... They were asking me to help them with estimates. So you would have to put it like a code in and it would like break down numbers. And I was so awful at it. They're like, you know what? Just go back to regular filing. Christine will handle this. Was that another case of them not appreciating you properly? No, you know what? That job was really annoying because I found a stray cat. And I asked them, could the stray cat live in the warehouse? And like, they were so mean about it. They're like absolutely not. So then I brought the cat home. And then my father said I couldn't keep the cat. I had to let the cat go in the woods. What? Wait, no, I mean, I just, you know, I found somebody to take it. Right. Was it an Amish family? Yeah, the death count is growing. The animal death count from Christine is growing here. And this is one I had never heard about until just now. And she snuck it in at the very end of the show. So I can't even ask follow-up questions about the cat that she pretended to take in. But then... His name was links.

You even named him before you got rid of it? Well, it was an import export company that like did something with Brockett. You're like George Costanza. Oh my goodness. I wish I had more time. I just don't. We have to go. But I guess we can add that to the list. Dylan, when you make a list of topics, is it written in pencil on paper? Do you send photos of it to Christine? I don't. I don't. Thankfully, I type it up otherwise. Good call. Good call. And with that, we are done. I am in shock, and I will process and be back here tomorrow in 21 hours for the Wednesday edition of Guy Benson. Have a great night. I had a first date at an Olive Garden, and I remember thinking, this is where he's going to take me. I'm not so sure the rest of the dates are going to be great. He turned out to be really nice. Anyway, I digress. Was his name Bobby? No, no, no. Okay, so it didn't work out.

Listen to the show ad free on Fox News Podcast Plus on Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music with your prime membership, or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.