Overview of The Shawn Ryan Show #356
In this episode, former Trump administration official Joe Kent discusses the midterm results, the Iran war, lobbying and political influence, and why he believes many voters feel betrayed. He argues that the war damaged U.S. credibility and the economy, and urges a shift toward diplomacy, less foreign intervention, and stronger accountability for elected officials.
Why Kent Says Voters Turned Against Trump
Kent describes the election as a backlash from voters who supported Trump in 2024 but later voted against his party. In his view, they were angry about the Iran war, rising fuel and living costs, and what they saw as broken campaign promises. He says voters’ frustration reflects a sense of betrayal more than support for Democrats.
He also argues that the administration focused on wealthy donors and corporate interests instead of its voters. He cites the sidelining of the Make America Healthy Again agenda and the administration’s reliance on paid influencers as examples of how political strategy displaced public concerns.
Susie Wiles, Lobbying, and the Iran War
Kent says Susie Wiles, then the White House chief of staff, controlled access to the president and gave lobbyists and pro-Israel voices influence over national security discussions. He says he cannot speak to her personal role in every policy decision, but believes she helped create a culture where dissent and unwelcome information were discouraged.
Kent recounts an instance in which he told Trump that intelligence about Iran came from Israel and lacked independent U.S. confirmation. He says he was subsequently excluded from future briefings. He argues that the president should have received clear context about the source and interests behind intelligence used to justify war, while emphasizing that Trump remained responsible for his decisions.
Kent’s Case for Ending the War
Kent says the administration underestimated the length and consequences of the conflict. He argues that the closure and disruption of the Strait of Hormuz drove up energy costs, strained relations with Gulf partners, and weakened confidence in U.S. security guarantees. He also says the war strengthened Iranian hardliners and made negotiations harder, especially after Iranian officials were killed.
His proposed course is to end U.S. hostilities, lift the blockade, and withdraw troops from vulnerable regional bases. He believes Iran and Gulf countries could then negotiate arrangements for shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, potentially including fees, while the United States explores sanctions relief in exchange for keeping the waterway open. He acknowledges that this would not restore the prewar situation, but argues continued fighting offers no clear path to a defined U.S. victory.
Kent links the conflict to a broader decline in U.S. influence. He says Gulf states may seek new security and trade arrangements, while China could gain influence through diplomacy and economic ties. He also criticizes U.S. support for the war in Ukraine, arguing that the costs to Americans and Ukrainians outweigh any clearly defined U.S. benefit.
Israel, U.S. Interests, and Political Influence
Kent argues that Israel’s security priorities and America’s strategic interests are not always the same. He portrays Israeli policy as accepting prolonged regional instability and says U.S. backing has enabled Israeli military and territorial ambitions. He also describes the relationship as valuable for Israeli intelligence and operations, while arguing that American reliance on Israel has weakened U.S. ability to gather intelligence independently.
The discussion turns to alleged Israeli lobbying influence in Washington. Kent says AIPAC-backed donors helped shape appointments and that proposed provisions in defense and intelligence authorization bills could expand U.S.–Israel cooperation. He urges lawmakers to remove those provisions and calls on voters to make corporate and foreign-interest money politically costly.
Political Accountability and the Road to 2028
Kent says neither party has earned lasting public trust. He argues that candidates could build support by opposing foreign wars and foreign influence while prioritizing American workers and domestic needs. He sees a potential opening for Republicans to reclaim those positions, but says continued support for the Iran war would further damage the party’s prospects.
He describes Stephen Miller as someone who understands Trump’s political base and could advise a return to the administration’s earlier promises. But Kent says that would require Miller to bring the president unwelcome news and challenge the White House’s insular culture.
Kent’s broader recommendations are for voters to stay engaged, scrutinize political funding, and hold leaders accountable for their actions in office. He is writing a book about his military and government experience and the political lessons he draws from it.