What's your take, Brian Finch?

Oh, I completely agree.

I mean, first of all, they're probably upset that some federal court judge hasn't ordered that pilot to be returned to Iranian custody, so they're losing that one.

And now this is, you know, the communists had a word for it, agitprop, agitation and propaganda.

That's all these stories are.

It flies in the face of the law.

It flies in the face of history.

They should be celebrating, and it's, it's insufferable for so many of these countries and opponents of the president

Uh, and of course, he used the so-called war on terrorism statutes, um, to take similar actions as President Trump, didn't he?

Oh, President Obama actually went further than anything that President Trump is doing.

President Obama issued a very leng- or had a very lengthy memorandum written that justified him killing American citizens overseas without any sort of due process.

As long as they were suspected of being associated with terrorists or presenting a, a potentially imminent threat to the United States, the, the, President Obama's legal team, and he agreed, said that he could order lethal drone strikes against American citizens anywhere in the world, uh, as long as it met those conditions, and he did so.

He did so hundreds of times.

So you look at the complaints that are being lodged against the president about, and his team about violations of the law of the war, it's silly.

And, you know, I've been thinking a lot about this, Greg, and it just, it's remarkable but also predictably pathetic that you see such unanimity about violations of the president with law of war, those alleged violations of the law of war.

That's legally absurd, isn't it?

Um, and in fact, uh, past presidents, um, have, have ignored it, including Barack Obama, uh, and of course he used the so-called war ground terrorism statutes, um, to take similar actions as President Trump, didn't he?

Oh, President Obama actually went further than anything that President Trump is doing.

President Obama...... issued a very len- or had a very lengthy memorandum written that justified h- him killing American citizens overseas without any sort of due process.

As long as they were suspected, uh, being associated with terrorists or presenting a potentially eminent threat to the United States, uh, the President Obama's legal team, and he agreed, said that he could order l- lethal drone strikes against American citizens anywhere in the world, uh, as long as it met those conditions.

And he did so.

He did so hundreds of times.

So you look at the complaints that are being lodged against the president a-bou- and his team about violations of the law of war, it's silly.

That's legally absurd, isn't it?

What is your take? Are these strikes legal or are they war crimes?

crimes?I, I mean, of course they're illegal and the arguments against them are as pathetic as they are predictable.

Uh, uh, you know, anything the president does is obviously the greatest travesty in the history of humankind.

The man could cure cancer and someone would say that's because he hates oncologists, right? And that's the only reason he did it.

And it's the same thing here.

I mean, obviously the president has the authority as the commander-in-chief under the Constitution to defend the United States.

Not everything requires an act of Congress, a declaration of war.

So am I missing something here if I see an imminent threat by the, uh, drug gangs in Venezuela that's not just about selling drugs and something bigger?

Because aren't they really afraid that the precedent that they themselves set would be used against them in the end?

They should be.

And you're absolutely right.

And the president and President Trump is absolutely right about trying to find nominees.

And whether it's a director of the FBI, whether it's the attorney general, whether it's the DNI, Tulsi Gabbard.

people who not only are going to ask questions, but know to work with people who ask questions as well.

And I think that's a bit of a subtler point that's not getting across to a lot of folks, is that it may be that someone like Chris Wray, he could have had some good intentions, but the people sitting below him, for example, might not have had good intentions and not given him the full information.

And it's probably why you're never going to want to you're not going to get a lot of good people that ever want to go into government.