The Briefing With Jen Psaki 7/23/26 — 🅼🆂🅽🅱️🅲 Breaking News Today July 23, 2026

[0:00] Because the transcripts are spicy. [0:03] The judges are a little bit like, no, you sit down, sir. [0:06] I'm going to tell you how it's going to go. [0:07] And I'm enjoying it. [0:09] I really can't overstate enough. [0:11] Not that I'm a lawyer, but I do, you know, live with a lawyer. [0:14] You know what lawyers think, yes. [0:17] Yeah, I mean, judges, this is not, like, we keep getting these, and this, [0:21] it truly is remarkable that it keeps happening. [0:23] Because it's not usually how judges talk. [0:25] Right. [0:25] What they're being confronted with is so sort of offensive [0:28] to their very sort of core that this is what we get. [0:32] This is where we are, and I'm here for it, as I know you are, too. [0:36] Well, have a great night. I'll see you tomorrow. [0:39] All right. See you tomorrow. [0:41] Okay. [0:42] I'm about to ask you a question that you probably think you know the answer to. [0:46] Did you hear the story about how the Trump administration dropped its super controversial subpoena? [0:51] How the Trump administration completely embarrassed itself in court and had to walk it all back? [0:56] Now, if you've been following the news today, which you probably have, [1:00] you might be tempted to answer that question with, yeah, Jen, I think I have heard that story. [1:04] I know the one you're talking about. [1:06] But don't be so sure you've heard it all. [1:07] Because if someone asks you, did you hear about Donald Trump's embarrassing subpoena fail, [1:14] the only correct response to that question is, which one? [1:17] Which embarrassing subpoena fail are you talking about? [1:20] Because somehow there are so many stories in the news recently that fit that very specific description. [1:26] I mean, for instance, there was this headline today in the New York Times, quote, [1:29] Trump administration drops subpoena demanding list of Jews from Penn. [1:36] Yeah, you heard that correctly. [1:37] I'm literally reading from the headline in the New York Times. [1:41] The Trump administration had to drop its subpoena for a list of Jews. [1:46] Now, you see, the back story here is that last year when Donald Trump launched his campaign to target America's colleges and universities, [1:52] Trump's Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had the great old idea of sending a subpoena to the University of Pennsylvania. [2:00] And that subpoena demanded membership rosters of, quote, [2:04] All clubs, groups, organizations, and recreation groups that were related to the Jewish religion, faith, ancestry, and national origin. [2:13] Yep. [2:14] Now, the University of Pennsylvania rightfully fought back. [2:18] They noted in their response that the Trump administration had entirely disregarded the frightening and well-documented history of governmental entities [2:26] that undertook efforts to identify and assemble information regarding persons of Jewish ancestry. [2:31] You don't say. [2:32] And so today, the Trump administration, like, they quietly withdrew that subpoena. [2:38] Maybe they realized it wasn't a great look to be issuing subpoenas that sound like they may have been drafted in Germany in the 1930s. [2:45] Maybe. [2:46] They don't usually have that much moral clarity, though. [2:48] So maybe they simply realized they were going to lose in court. [2:51] Who knows? [2:53] Now, you might be thinking to yourself, okay, okay, you got me. [2:56] I thought you were talking about the Trump administration's other subpoena fail, [3:00] the one where they tried to subpoena journalists. [3:02] But that still begs the question, which one? [3:06] Because the Trump administration has had several recent embarrassing walkbacks that fit that even more specific description. [3:12] Just last month, the New York Times reported that the Justice Department withdrew several subpoenas [3:17] that would have forced reporters from the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post to testify before a federal grand jury. [3:22] And people familiar with the matter told the Times that the Justice Department had sought information from three reporters at the Wall Street Journal [3:28] about an article detailing how top officials warned Mr. Trump of the risks of a major military campaign against Iran. [3:36] It also sought information from a reporter at the Washington Post about reporting related to U.S. military action in Venezuela. [3:42] But the Justice Department, they backed down after the news organizations fought them in sealed filings. [3:47] The Trump administration is waging a campaign targeting journalists and their sources in their hunt for leakers at the White House. [3:55] But it's clear those efforts are failing as media organizations are starting to stand up more and more and more and push back more and more and more. [4:05] Which brings me to the Trump administration's other big subpoena fail, the one you probably have heard about. [4:10] Because today the Justice Department of Justice withdrew its subpoenas to several New York Times journalists who reported on the security issues plaguing Trump's Qatar gift plane. [4:19] You know that one, his favorite little toy. [4:21] Those subpoenas were withdrawn after the Trump administration got a humiliating smackdown. [4:26] And I was just referencing with Chris from a federal judge. [4:29] And I'm going to get to that part in a moment. [4:30] But first, I think it's worth reflecting just briefly on how we got here. [4:34] Because remember last year, Trump accepted a luxury jet from Qatar as a, quote, gift, a jet that his administration has refused to rule out letting him keep after he leaves office. [4:44] He wanted to use that jet as his new Air Force One, which would have required significant security upgrades at taxpayers' expense. [4:51] Then earlier this month, Trump decided to take his new jet to the NATO summit in Turkey, surprising many security experts who were skeptical that the necessary upgrades would have been completed in time. [5:01] Then after reigniting his war with Iran, Trump announced abruptly that he'd be leaving Turkey aboard the original Air Force One, claiming at the time it was so U.S. service members could see his favorite new toy. [5:16] In spite the fact that he also claimed it wasn't a security issue, most people suspected that the real reason was that the Qatari jet was not secure enough for presidential travel. [5:24] And it wasn't long, of course it wasn't, before the New York Times confirmed through reporting what everyone had already suspected, that Trump's luxury gift fell short of the standards necessary to keep the president of the United States as safe as possible. [5:39] And that was a legitimate scoop from those reporters at the New York Times. [5:42] But it also wasn't exactly a big national security secret they were breaking. [5:46] I mean, after all, as some experts pointed out, some of the security systems you need to protect Air Force One are actually quite visible on the exterior of the plane. [5:56] And earlier this week, Trump himself almost appeared to confirm the Times reporting when he was asked why he wasn't using the new plane. [6:02] It has a lot, and, you know, it has a lot of capability, but as I understand it, in about a month or so, they're going to send it to have it be maxed out. [6:20] So they're going to be sending it, and they'll have it be maxed out. [6:24] It'll take you about a month. [6:26] There you go. [6:27] Of course, none of that stopped the Trump administration from taking the drastic action of subpoenaing the journalists who embarrassed the president by pointing out the deficiencies of his shiny new toy. [6:38] Now, subpoenaing a reporter or news media organization about their sources is a very serious thing, because the First Amendment usually protects reporters and their right to keep sources confidential. [6:47] Which is why the Justice Department is supposed to exercise extreme caution any time an investigation zeroes in on members of the press. [6:54] They know they have to meet a very high bar. [6:57] But Trump's DOJ appears to have thrown caution to the wind in their wild goose chase to find the leakers who bruised Trump's fragile ego. [7:04] And they screwed this up in so many different ways. [7:07] In fact, some of those subpoenas were so reckless and so broad that they sought records not just from the journalists themselves, but those journalists' family members as well. [7:15] So when a federal judge grilled them today, and the federal judge did grill them, the DOJ's lawyers had to admit over and over again in open court that their subpoenas had some obvious flaws. [7:27] Flaws they repeatedly tried to characterize as, quote, inadvertent errors, oversights, and mistakes. [7:34] That's how they described them. [7:36] And given their many admitted errors, the judge repeatedly asked the DOJ lawyers if they wanted to withdraw their subpoena or suffer the embarrassment of having him quash them himself. [7:43] Now, the DOJ lawyers eventually took the judge up on his offer and withdrew the subpoenas. [7:49] It's honestly hard to overstate what a huge embarrassment this was for the DOJ. [7:52] And they made no secret of the fact that they were waging an uphill battle, given how little due diligence they had actually done before resorting to the subpoenas against journalists. [8:01] But then immediately after the hearing was over, the Justice Department released a statement blasting the judge and claiming his conduct overrides clear longstanding principles and common sense, which is quite rich, given just how many times DOJ lawyers admitted in court that they themselves screwed up the subpoenas. [8:19] Now, we also learned from this hearing that acting attorney general Todd Blanche himself signed off on these subpoenas, which is embarrassing for Todd Blanche, the guy who's waiting to see if there were the votes to be the attorney general, given how sloppy they were, these subpoenas. [8:36] But also a clear indication of just how important this witch hunt was to the Trump administration and probably to Donald Trump himself. [8:41] Now, it should come as no surprise that Trump and his administration were willing to trample over the principle of press freedom in their effort to placate the president. [8:49] But what might be a surprise is just how quickly those efforts fall apart when news organizations stand up and push back. [8:56] Remember that Trump has been targeting media organizations since day one of this administration. [9:01] And early on, we saw several major media outlets effectively surrender in advance. [9:06] None of that appeased Donald Trump. Of course it didn't. [9:08] He kept pushing the boundaries and abusing power to curtail the free press. [9:12] But now more major media organizations are standing up to him and learning that when they fight back, they actually usually win. [9:20] Joining me now is the former executive editor of The Washington Post, Marty Baron. [9:24] Thank you for being here. [9:26] Marty, I just did my best to kind of summarize this wild day, and really wild journey of a story, but wild day in court today that ended with the Trump Justice Department withdrawing those subpoenas. [9:38] Let me just start by getting your top-line reaction to what happened today. [9:41] Well, I think you had a great summary. [9:45] I think it's just another example of sloppy, reckless, abusive, and really fundamentally lawless behavior by this administration's Department of Justice. [9:55] And so they got the result that they did with a judge saying either withdraw these subpoenas or have them quashed. [10:00] Now, it's still possible that they'll come back again with new subpoenas, and I suspect that in the future they'll subpoena journalists' telephone calls, their emails, their texts. [10:09] They'll subpoena them seeking to compel testimony before grand juries in future instances, because their intent here is to harass and really try to intimidate journalists. [10:20] I think to that point, I think most people who were aware of this news were pretty shocked when we learned that family members of some of these reporters had also gotten subpoenas. [10:33] Today, a Justice Department lawyer said this was actually a mistake. [10:37] Sometimes we lose sight of what's normal and what's not. [10:40] I mean, you are no stranger as a former editor of a major newspaper of what subpoenas look like to newspapers. [10:46] What did you make of that? [10:48] Well, I'd never seen that before. [10:50] So that was really, that was really extraordinary and certainly uncalled for. [10:54] I don't think it was a mistake on their part. [10:56] I think it was entirely deliberate. [10:58] All of these things are really deliberate. [11:00] In fact, they were subpoenaing telephone calls that went back to the beginning of the year, [11:05] well before the New York Times actually published this story that's at issue here. [11:10] So clearly it was a broad subpoena, really an effort to try to fish for the sources of the New York Times reporters [11:17] and beyond that to really try to intimidate the press. [11:22] And so, you know, it's just part of a campaign that's been going on for a long period of time, [11:27] even in the first term, even in Trump's first term toward the end of it. [11:30] They sought texts and emails of Washington Post reporters, New York Times reporters, CNN reporters, [11:37] and they were very aggressive and they're even more aggressive now during the second term. [11:43] Yeah, as you mentioned, I mean, they went back before the timeline of the reporting on the Qatari jet back to January, [11:50] which as you just said, but I would love for you to elaborate this on more so people understand it. [11:54] That seems to be to try to get more access, greater access to their sources in the administration, [11:59] in the White House potentially, even outside of the scope of what this would have been about. [12:03] Is that right? Or can you expand on that a little bit more? [12:06] Well, I think that's exactly what they were trying to do, [12:08] is that they were trying to find out who these reporters' sources are. [12:12] They were trying to find not only the identities of their sources, [12:15] but trying to intimidate their sources and to intimidate journalists overall. [12:19] And frankly, you know, to be quite direct about it, [12:22] I think they're real, you know, they said all along that the target was not, [12:26] we're not, the journalists were not the targets, [12:28] but I believe that the journalists are their targets. [12:31] The effort here is to intimidate them, to harass them, [12:33] to abuse them, to force media companies to incur enormous legal costs. [12:38] And I believe that this administration really does want to put journalists in jail. [12:43] And here's why I say that, because going back to 2022, [12:46] Trump talked at at least a couple of rallies about his desire to put journalists in prison [12:51] for revealing what he deems to be national security secrets. [12:56] And he said that when they were in prison, as he put it, [12:59] they would meet their bride, [13:00] which meant that they would be subjected to rape, prison rape. [13:04] And that at that point, they would reveal their sources. [13:07] And he said that at his rallies, [13:09] where it was received with laughter, applause, cheers, all that sort of thing. [13:14] And I believe that he clearly does want to put journalists in jail [13:17] because they know that if they seek to compel testimony before a grand jury, [13:22] no journalists for a reputable news organization will reveal those sources. [13:26] And then the Justice Department will seek to have them held in contempt of court. [13:30] And when the journalists continue to refuse to reveal their sources, [13:33] there's always the possibility that a judge will put them in prison. [13:38] It is really, I mean, you know, [13:40] I think sometimes we optimistically like to think that they may be deterred, [13:44] but it sounds like you're saying you don't think that's where this is headed at all. [13:49] I don't think this administration is going to be deterred. [13:52] They will continue to seek testimony, grand jury testimony, I suspect in future cases. [13:58] Maybe they'll come back even on this case again and try again. [14:02] They will seek to obtain the sources of these journalists [14:06] through getting their texts, through their phone calls, through emails. [14:11] Now, most journalists who are dealing in national security matters [14:14] and in other matters these days are taking additional measures [14:18] to protect their sources as they should. [14:21] Even so, this Justice Department is going to use everything within its power [14:25] to put pressure on journalists. [14:27] And notwithstanding what they say, that journalists are not the targets, [14:32] journalists really are their targets. [14:35] Let me ask you about, because I think what's so important right now [14:37] is for people to really understand what's fact and fiction here. [14:41] And you hear the administration hang a lot on national security concerns, as they call it. [14:46] It seems to be their explanation for why they're not sharing more on the Iran war. [14:50] Also, it's their explanation for the Qatari jet and sort of their justification in this case, too. [14:58] I have been a part of phone calls where administrations are making the case [15:02] for why something should not be reported. [15:05] It's obviously always up to the media organization. [15:07] Typically, it's about a situation where an American citizen is being held overseas [15:11] and there's an operation, maybe the identity of a covert operative. [15:14] There are other cases. [15:17] Help people understand what is the bar for what is an actual national security concern [15:21] where an editor might say, we can't publish this. [15:24] And where do you see this as overly sweeping in terms of how the administration is using that justification? [15:30] Well, I think there are various issues here. [15:33] I mean, certainly you don't want to put troops at risk. [15:35] You don't want to put intelligence agents at risk, facilities at risk for intelligence purposes, [15:40] things of that sort. [15:41] But in this instance, of course, as you noted, you have a plane where people had already observed [15:46] that this new Air Force One that was gifted to Trump by the Qataris, [15:53] that it did not have the defensive features that the other Air Force One, the older Air Force One, had. [15:59] And look, I mean, the real risk to national security was committed by the president of the United States, [16:05] that he actually used a plane that did not have these defensive features. [16:09] That was the risk to national security. [16:12] And obviously, the press ought to be reporting on that sort of reckless, [16:17] even, I think, childish behavior by the president of the United States, [16:20] because he was trying to show off his new toy to the world. [16:25] And that was the purpose of it, even when it put he himself, the president of the United States, at risk. [16:31] It really does seem like, and not to be overly Pollyanna-ish here, [16:36] but it does seem like every time a media organization has punched back at the administration [16:39] over an intimidation tactic like this, the administration loses in court. [16:44] They back down. [16:45] I hope that continues to be the case. [16:46] We'll see. [16:47] I know you've been observing all of this from the outside, [16:49] and you've been pretty clear about what you think could still happen here. [16:53] But what do you think the lesson is here for people running media organizations at this point [16:58] about what they need to be prepared for and what they should be prepared to do [17:02] in terms of fighting back in their ability to do their jobs? [17:06] Well, I think this was all highly anticipated. [17:08] I believe the New York Times set aside money for its own defense. [17:12] It knew that it was going to have to face these kinds of attacks on its independence, on its work, [17:18] and so it was prepared for it. [17:20] Smaller news organizations would have a more difficult time. [17:23] You know, one-person operations would have a more difficult time. [17:26] But I do think that the lesson is that we should fight back. [17:30] And it's not just journalists who should be fighting back. [17:33] Everybody should be defending their rights, the right to free expression of all types, [17:38] but all of their rights. [17:39] And when you push back, there is a good chance you're going to win. [17:43] It doesn't mean that you will always win. [17:44] And I'm not entirely confident that the press will always win in these instances. [17:49] But it's very important for us to stand up for our rights, because if we don't exercise these [17:55] rights, then these rights are deprived of meaning. [17:58] If we don't defend these rights, then we will lose them. [18:02] Marty Barron, can't thank you enough for being here. [18:04] Thank you again. [18:06] Thank you. [18:07] Coming up, oil prices are soaring, as I'm sure you've all noticed. [18:11] Gas prices are ticking back up. [18:12] And Donald Trump's war with Iran seems to once again be spiraling out of control. [18:17] We'll talk about that with someone who knows more about oil markets and gas prices than [18:20] I want anyone else. [18:21] We'll be right back. [18:29] Today, Brent crude oil, which helps determine the price of globally traded oil, closed at [18:33] more than $100 a barrel for the first time since May, thanks to a war that is not only [18:38] escalating, but widening. [18:41] Take a look at the map you can see on your screen. [18:43] This is published by The New York Times today, which shows how Iran is continuing to target [18:47] U.S. military sites in the region and how it's really expanded over the last several [18:52] weeks. [18:53] Also today, Iranian-backed Houthi rebels attacked two Saudi oil tankers in the Red [18:57] Sea and threatened to shut down that key waterway, a move that would cause prices to skyrocket [19:01] even higher. [19:03] And consider already, even before that, where gas prices already are. [19:07] Just take a look at some headlines from across the country. [19:09] Here's one. [19:10] Average gas price returns to $4 a gallon. [19:13] Here's another one from Arizona. [19:14] Gas prices jumped 37 cents in a week. [19:17] And in Arkansas, gas prices jumped 24 cents. [19:19] North Carolina gas prices climbed. [19:21] Drivers say they feel the pinch. [19:23] Michigan gas prices up again, as well as in Texas and Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Georgia, [19:28] Colorado, on and on and on, and probably wherever you are living as well. [19:32] And right now, there are no signs that this war is going to end anytime soon. [19:36] In fact, most of the signs we're seeing point to the opposite. [19:40] Trump told Axios today that he is close to a decision on launching another massive attack [19:45] on Iran. [19:46] It does not take a rocket scientist to know that accelerating this war could send energy [19:51] prices even higher than they already are. [19:53] But exactly how bad can they get? [19:56] And what would it take to see some relief? [19:58] I think this is probably something you are all wondering. [20:01] Thankfully, my next guest is a perfect person to ask about all of this. [20:05] Joining me now is Amos Hochstein, one of the world's leading experts on energy security and [20:09] diplomacy, who served in both the Biden and Obama administrations. [20:13] It's good to see you. [20:14] Thank you for being here. [20:16] Great to be back. [20:16] Okay. [20:17] Back in March, you were here. [20:19] We were not even one month into the war. [20:22] And I asked, I spoke, we talked about the impact on oil and gas prices. [20:25] And you said at the time, we were experiencing the worst energy crisis the world has ever seen. [20:31] How would you describe it now? [20:33] Getting worse. [20:34] So, look, I think that a large reason why we ended up in this bizarre MOU between Trump [20:42] administration and Iran was because he finally realized what I was saying on TV and others [20:47] were telling him, look, if we continue the war at a steady pace, he was weeks away from [20:53] getting to what's called tank bottoms, where you can't get more oil out or more gasoline [20:58] out and we're going to go towards crisis. [20:59] He had weeks away from that catastrophic event. [21:03] So, he decided to do the MOU in a very hurried way, which you can tell by reading the MOU. [21:09] It's a page and a half to end a war. [21:12] And the problems that we're having right now in the war are resulting from how quickly that [21:17] was drafted because it has ambiguous language that the Iranians read one way, the U.S. [21:22] reads a different way. [21:24] And that's why we're back in this conflict now. [21:27] So, but something even worse happened just in the last few weeks. [21:32] Over the last several months, Ukrainians have been successfully attacking the Russian oil [21:38] infrastructure, their refineries. [21:40] So, now we have two wars that are colliding and coalescing in the worst way possible for [21:47] oil markets, for gasoline, for diesel, for jet fuel. [21:50] Russia was 11% of the diesel export market. [21:54] They're at zero now. [21:55] All of their refineries are basically up in flames. [21:58] Today, just today, a few hours ago, Kazakhstan announced so much damage. [22:03] They're stopping their exports through Russia. [22:06] So, it just gets compounded. [22:07] And everything you've said, the Houthis have now come in. [22:10] So, in April, so March, April, May, we have a war that we have tools to answer. [22:15] Now we're going back to war. [22:17] Those tools, some of them still exist. [22:19] Some of them are gone. [22:20] They don't exist anymore, and the ones that we have are diminishing, and we have another [22:24] war that is combining with the Iran war. [22:28] And it's all about availability out there in the oil markets, as I've learned from you [22:31] and many others from working together before. [22:34] I think people watching have probably seen also, and you just referenced the Houthis. [22:37] I talked about it earlier as well. [22:39] I mean, and I referenced how the Houthi attacked some Saudi oil tankers in the Red Sea today. [22:44] There's also been this threat of traffic being cut off, not just in the Strait of Hormuz, [22:49] of course, but also in the place in the Red Sea, where ships also go through. [22:55] What would the impact of that be if that is really brought to a halt? [22:59] So, that is really bad, because what happens when we shut down the straits, the Saudis and [23:05] the UAE are the only ones that have infrastructure to go around the UAE, sorry, around Iran or the [23:11] Strait of Hormuz, to the Red Sea. [23:14] If you suddenly attack the Saudi ships where they did, in what's called the Bab al-Mandab [23:19] crossing, and Yanbu, which is the area in Saudi Arabia where they load the ships, [23:24] then you've taken the alternatives. [23:26] So, now you've taken millions of barrels that have been able to make them themselves onto the market [23:32] are now gone, because that route. [23:35] And two ships turned around, made a U-turn turned around. [23:38] And now, even if they do go through, the risk premiums are high, so the insurance rates go up. [23:44] If we're going to go 10 ships a day, we're now down to two, because everybody's a little bit sluggish. [23:49] Who pays the price for all of these things? [23:51] Ultimately, the consumer, because we can't get oil out. [23:54] We can't get gasoline out or diesel. [23:57] That's why we're already at $4.10 on average in the country. [24:00] It's going up from here, and probably significantly. [24:04] Some states had suspended their gas taxes, gasoline taxes, but they're supposed to come back now. [24:11] So, all the prices are now going back. [24:13] And into this environment, the president has just said, we're going to go to a bigger war, [24:18] a more expansive war. [24:19] And the Houthis are saying, well, we're activated. [24:22] So, now we have the Houthis in the Red Sea. [24:25] We have the Iranians on the Strait of Hormuz. [24:28] And the Ukrainians attacking the Russian infrastructure, this is too much pressure [24:34] for any of our tools to really work anymore. [24:37] So, consumers need to know. [24:38] If you see a headline that Trump says, we're going back to war, [24:41] or they see a headline, we're striking again, go fill up your car. [24:46] It's going to get much more expensive. [24:47] I'm going to speak for everybody watching right now who's hearing you say that. [24:50] How high could it go? [24:52] You referenced it kind of hitting a bottom. [24:54] Are we close to that? [24:56] What does that look like? [24:57] And how high, if this continues another month, another two months, [25:00] as you're projecting out? [25:01] What does that look like in terms of gas prices? [25:04] It can't continue for another two months. [25:05] Because if you continue in this rate, the way we are right now for two months, [25:10] our economy can't, the structures of our economy will fall apart. [25:14] Because the SPR is not endless. [25:17] The Strategic Petroleum Reserve. [25:18] The Strategic Petroleum Reserve. [25:19] It's going to go below 300, probably next week, 300 million barrels. [25:23] It hasn't been that low in 40 years. [25:25] We also took a lot out during the Russia-Ukraine, but never this low. [25:29] Once it goes below 300, towards 250, the structure itself, [25:34] the integrity of the structure starts getting questioned. [25:36] And how much you can take out gets lower. [25:39] So it can continue. [25:40] Prices will go up. [25:42] We're probably on the march to $4.50. [25:44] We're now at $4.10. [25:46] If we keep going into war, we'll be at $5. [25:49] And from there it goes up. [25:50] And it gets, people will have to stop doing, living their lives the way they were. [25:56] Because remember, gasoline is important when we fill up our cars. [26:00] But diesel is like the lubricant of the American economy. [26:03] The food in your supermarket comes to the supermarket on a truck that's hauling it for a long time. [26:08] All the products, all those Amazon delivery trucks that are arriving at your house, [26:12] all that's on trucks, all that goes on diesel. [26:15] When diesel prices go this high, it gets very expensive. [26:18] And here's the other thing that happens. [26:20] The Treasury notes, how we borrow money in the United States, [26:24] are also climbing very fast over the last week or two. [26:27] We're at really high levels. [26:29] That means that the inflation rates go up. [26:32] That means interest rates go up. [26:34] Everybody's costs are going to go up. [26:36] Not just at your gas station, but in your supermarket and all the products that you're, [26:42] just before you think about going back to school, all the products you're going to buy, [26:45] they're all going to cost more. [26:47] Amos, I don't know if you've calmed anyone, but you've certainly, well, that wasn't the goal. [26:50] I think you've given people a really clear picture of what to expect [26:53] and what they should prepare for as this war continues. [26:56] Thank you so much for being here. [26:57] Or we don't go back to war. [26:58] Well, that's the hope. [26:59] But we don't know how this is ending. [27:01] And that's the big question. [27:02] Thank you again. [27:02] Okay, up next, Trump's allies try to smear another one of his perceived enemies [27:07] in the court of public opinion. [27:08] The great and fan favorite Andrew Weissman is standing by, [27:12] and he joins us to talk about it next.