Before the American Revolution came the French and Indian War—a conflict that redrew maps, ignited colonial unrest, and brought to the world stage a young man who would change the course of history. Thomas Kidd, author of American History Volumes 1 and 2, explains how this war set the stage for America’s fight for independence. Watch our content ad-free on our app: https://prageru.onelink.me/3bas/vgyxvm79 Donate to PragerU: https://l.prageru.com/4jiAT85 Follow PragerU: Instagram ➡️ (https://www.instagram.com/prageru/) X ➡️ (https://twitter.com/prageru) Facebook ➡️ (https://www.facebook.com/prageru/) TikTok ➡️ (https://www.tiktok.com/@prageru)

Before the American Revolution in 1776, there was another revolution decades earlier. This one wasn’t about freedom vs. tyranny, but about something else entirely, and it changed the face of the developing nation almost as profoundly as the War of Independence did. Thomas Kidd, author of American History Volumes 1 and 2, tells the story. Watch our content ad-free on our app: https://prageru.onelink.me/3bas/vgyxvm79 Donate to PragerU: https://l.prageru.com/4jiAT85 Follow PragerU: Instagram ➡️ (https://www.instagram.com/prageru/) X ➡️ (https://twitter.com/prageru) Facebook ➡️ (https://www.facebook.com/prageru/) TikTok ➡️ (https://www.tiktok.com/@prageru) Transcript: Colonial America: The Great Awakening Presented by Thomas Kidd The first American revolution didn’t happen in 1776. It happened nearly fifty years earlier. And it wasn’t about politics; it was about religion. We know it as the Great Awakening, and it changed America almost as profoundly as the War of Independence did. By the 1730s, the American colonies had achieved a permanency — that is, they were now a fixture on the global landscape. With more and more European settlers arriving every year, the future looked bright. To some, and to one clergyman in particular, the new prosperity came at a steep price. That clergyman was Jonathan Edwards, the fiery and brilliant pastor of Northampton Congregationalist Church in Massachusetts. Edwards was disturbed by what he saw as his parishioners’ complacency. It wasn’t enough for them to show up in church on Sunday, he asserted. They needed a personal relationship with God, something that could not be mediated by clergy. God’s grace alone, not religious ritual, would save them from the fires of Hell. “…If we improve our lives to any other purpose, than as a journey toward heaven, all our labour will be lost.” Edwards’s message struck a chord. Within a year, almost every resident of his frontier town professed to be, as the New Testament puts it, “born again.” It was the beginning of evangelical Christianity in America. If Edwards kindled a new religious fervor, it was George Whitefield who fanned it into a bonfire. Whitefield was born in England in 1714. Although he studied philosophy and theology at Oxford University, he never took a permanent pulpit. Instead, he traveled from town to town as a preacher, first in England and then in the colonies. A naturally gifted orator and an incredibly hard worker, Whitefield attracted mind-boggling crowds — 20,000 in Boston (at a time when it had a population of 17,000) and 25,000 in Philadelphia, to cite just two examples. People would travel long distances, often walking or riding for days to hear him speak. All this attention made him America’s first true celebrity. It also connected Whitefield to an ambitious printer and future celebrity himself, Benjamin Franklin. Franklin saw an opportunity for a major windfall in publishing Whitefield’s works, while Whitefield saw an opportunity to get his message out to even more Americans. Both were right. Franklin made a fortune, and Whitefield made more converts. The Great Awakening was fundamentally a spiritual event. But it also had profound political consequences. The quintessentially American idea of religious liberty took shape during this period. Before the Great Awakening, American religious practices were tightly regulated by the government. Pastors generally did not have the freedom to start new churches or preach wherever they wished. But the Awakening’s popularity and its focus on the individual’s relationship with God overwhelmed these restrictions. It also stirred the first inklings of revolution. If you could rebel against the established church, you could rebel against the Crown. But the Great Awakening did even more than that. It shaped America’s pre-Revolutionary culture. Not only did it increase biblical literacy throughout the colonies, it also rooted America in a Judeo-Christian worldview. For example, Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, perhaps the two least doctrinaire of the Founders, wanted the seal of the United States to feature Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt under the motto "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." When noted patriot Patrick Henry exhorted his Virginia colleagues to embrace the cause of revolution in his 1775 “Liberty or Death” oration, he used Biblical language to do it. He declared that “An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us.” His audience, reared during the Great Awakening, understood that kind of talk. So did Jefferson, who used religious language to capture the sacred spirit of liberty in the Declaration of Independence: “all men are created equal… [and are] endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights… among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” ...access the full transcript here 👉 https://l.prageru.com/49CswT0

The Salem Witch Trials of 1692 remain one of the most infamous—and misunderstood—episodes in American history. What caused the panic? Why did so many go along with it? And how did this dark chapter shape America’s future? Thomas Kidd, author of American History Volumes 1 and 2, explains. Watch our content ad-free on our app: https://prageru.onelink.me/3bas/vgyxvm79 Donate to PragerU: https://l.prageru.com/4jiAT85 Follow PragerU: Instagram ➡️ (https://www.instagram.com/prageru/) X ➡️ (https://twitter.com/prageru) Facebook ➡️ (https://www.facebook.com/prageru/) TikTok ➡️ (https://www.tiktok.com/@prageru) Transcript: Colonial America: The Salem Witch Trials Presented by Thomas Kidd No episode in early American history is more infamous or misunderstood than the Salem Witch Trials of 1692. Before they were over, nineteen people, five men and fourteen women, were convicted of engaging in witchcraft and were subsequently executed by hanging. One other was pressed to death with heavy stones, still more died in prison awaiting trial, and many more would have died if cooler heads had not finally prevailed. From a contemporary perspective, it’s hard to understand why the trials happened at all. But for the people living in Salem at the end of the 17th century, there was no such mystery. Puritan New England was a profoundly Bible-based society. So, when the Old Testament denounced witchcraft and sorcery, they took it seriously. Massachusetts law mandated that “If any man or woman be a witch… they shall be put to death.” But why did witch trials happen in Salem when they did? What was the precipitating cause? After all, the Massachusetts colony had existed for sixty-two years without similar upheaval. Why now? Many theories have been offered, and none are fully satisfying. All we know for sure was that it was a period of deep instability — socially, economically and religiously. First, there was uncertainty as to where the colony stood with England, the Mother Country. In 1684, in a move to assert the Crown’s authority, and thereby curtail Massachusetts’ ability to rule itself, King Charles II revoked the colony’s founding charter. That itself was traumatic. Then, in 1690, things got much worse. In response to French and Indian raids, Massachusetts authorities ordered an attack against French forces at Quebec. It was a complete rout. This devastating loss to French Catholics led the Puritans to wonder why, in the words of one of their leaders, God had “spit in our face.” All this turmoil made Massachusetts ripe for a panic. That panic ignited when a group of teenage girls began to suffer from inexplicable fits and convulsions. The young women claimed they had been afflicted by demons. They accused a slave named Tituba, who was owned by one of Salem’s ministers, of being a witch. Under duress, Tituba offered a confession. She went on to suggest that there were other witches operating in and around the town. Soon, the accusations began to multiply into the dozens, then hundreds. Most of those accused were older women, often widows and social outcasts. They appeared, so it was charged, as “specters,” or spirits, who urged their “victims” to sign a covenant with the devil. This “spectral evidence” was all the hastily convened special court needed to pronounce a guilty verdict. In the calculus of the moment, anyone who confessed was spared execution. Only those who maintained their innocence were punished without mercy. Before long, the accused included prominent figures in Massachusetts society, and the trials became increasingly problematic. The judges and pastors started to have second thoughts. The influential Boston minister Increase Mather saw something more sinister. Not only had the judges gotten it wrong, he asserted, they had been led to their perverse conclusion by Satan himself: “The Devil is in it,” he wrote. “All Superstition is from him. And when secret things… are discovered by Superstitious practices, some Compact and Communion with the Devil is the Cause of it…” Mather highlighted the consequences of such thinking in what became the most famous quote of the whole shameful affair: “It were better that Ten Suspected Witches should escape, than that one Innocent Person should be Condemned.” ...access the full transcript here 👉 https://l.prageru.com/4nUZLEo

One was founded on profit. The other on faith. Jamestown and Plymouth shaped two powerful forces in American life: commerce and religion. Thomas Kidd, author of American History Volumes 1 and 2, tells the story of the colonies that helped set the stage for the nation to come. Watch our content ad-free on our app: https://prageru.onelink.me/3bas/vgyxvm79 Donate to PragerU: https://l.prageru.com/4jiAT85 Follow PragerU: Instagram ➡️ (https://www.instagram.com/prageru/) X ➡️ (https://twitter.com/prageru) Facebook ➡️ (https://www.facebook.com/prageru/) TikTok ➡️ (https://www.tiktok.com/@prageru) Transcript: Colonial America: Jamestown vs. Plymouth Presented by Thomas Kidd What would make a seventeenth-century European leave the relative comfort and safety of the Old World for a perilous life in the New? This “New World” wasn’t just new, it was utterly unknown. Getting there was incredibly dangerous. Imagine taking an ocean voyage on a small wooden ship equipped only with sails and simple navigational tools. And once you arrived — if you arrived — then what? How would you survive? What would you eat? Were the natives friendly or hostile? These are only a few of the daunting challenges and questions that faced the first American colonists. Their motivations for coming were complex. But for our purposes, we can put them into two broad categories: financial and religious. The financial was represented by the settlement at Jamestown, Virginia, established in 1607. The religious was represented by the settlement at Plymouth, Massachusetts, established in 1620. By comparing these two colonies, we can learn much about the origins of America. The colonists who established Jamestown in 1607 were sponsored by the Virginia Company of London, a profit-making venture. 104 intrepid souls made up the first group. There was not a single woman among them, suggesting they had little intention of settling down, but hoped to make some easy money and return home to England as wealthy men. That hope was based on the naïve belief that gold would be so abundant in the New World that they could just pick it up off the ground. Though they experienced many natural wonders, precious metals were not among them. Their disappointment was compounded by the unfortunate fact that they built Jamestown near marshes — prime incubators for disease-bearing mosquitos. Just three years after that first ship landed, 440 of the first 500 colonists were dead. The survivors tried selling timber for export and even experimented with making wine. But nothing seemed to catch on until 1614 when they began cultivating tobacco, already a popular consumer product in Europe. By 1617, a visitor to Virginia observed that the small colony’s “streets and all other spare places [are] planted with tobacco...” Harvesting the broad, brown-leafed plant was labor intensive. As the century progressed, the Virginians came to rely more and more on slave labor, already being utilized on English sugar plantations in the Caribbean. The Jamestown colonists were Christians, and one of the first things they did was set up a church — the earliest Protestant church in North America — but faith did not fuel the colonists’ ambition. Profit did. By contrast, the Plymouth colonists came seeking religious freedom. They were “Separatist” Christians, meaning they believed that the Church of England, the nation’s official denomination, had become fatally corrupt. True Christians, they believed, should “separate” from the national church and form their own congregations. But doing this was illegal in the British Isles. ...access the full transcript here 👉 https://l.prageru.com/3WHs523

Joseph Biden spent his career chasing one goal: the presidency. After decades of political frustration, he finally became the 46th president of the United States. What happened next is one of American history’s tragic ironies. Presidential historian Tevi Troy explores Biden’s rise and fall. 📲 Watch our content ad-free on our app: https://prageru.onelink.me/3bas/vgyxvm79 This video is part of the American Presidents 5-Minute Video Series 👉 https://l.prageru.com/4oOQLkW Once you've seen them all, take our Presidents Quiz 👉 https://l.prageru.com/3LoM9Ug Donate to PragerU: https://l.prageru.com/4jiAT85 Follow PragerU: Instagram ➡️ (https://www.instagram.com/prageru/) X ➡️ (https://twitter.com/prageru) Facebook ➡️ (https://www.facebook.com/prageru/) TikTok ➡️ (https://www.tiktok.com/@prageru) Transcript: Joe Biden: Decline and Fall Presented by Tevi Troy, Joe Biden was a young man in a hurry. Elected to the US Senate at the age of 29, he spent four decades dreaming of becoming president. But then, in one of American history’s tragic ironies, when he finally got there, he was incapable of doing the job. Father Time had exacted a cruel price. Joseph Robinette—forever known as Joe—Biden was born in the coal-mining town of Scranton, Pennsylvania on November 20, 1942. His father moved the family to Wilmington, Delaware when Biden was ten, but Biden would always stress his working-class Scranton origins. Young Joe was popular and a good athlete, but just got by academically. At Syracuse Law School, he graduated 76th out of a class of 85. After getting caught plagiarizing a law review article, a pattern emerged that persisted throughout his life: if he didn’t like a version of his past, he’d make up a better one. Examples include getting arrested when trying to visit South African civil rights activist Nelson Mandela in prison, being shot at while touring Iraq as a senator, and his uncle getting eaten by cannibals in Papua New Guinea during World War II—all fabrications. In 1972, after a brief tenure on a Delaware county council, he challenged incumbent Republican senator J. Caleb Boggs. Biden’s youthful energy captured the voters’ imagination. In a shocking upset, he defeated Boggs by 3,000 votes. Before he could take office, tragedy struck. In December 1972, his wife Neilia and one-year-old daughter Amy were killed in a car crash. His sons Beau and Hunter were badly injured. Biden pushed past his grief and entered the Senate, the youngest member in that exclusive club. There, Biden thrived. There’s no doubt that he had political skills. You don’t get elected to the Senate seven times, vice president twice, and ultimately president without being good at politics. Winning re-election after re-election, he advanced in seniority and influence. But make no mistake, the presidency was always his goal. In 1987, he ran for the Democratic nomination. That attempt failed when he was caught plagiarizing a speech by a British politician. He ran again in 2007 but got swept away by Barack Obama. Then, Obama, to the surprise of many, tapped Biden to be his running mate. It seemed like a good match of young gun and old pro. As vice president, Biden served loyally for eight years, but when it came time for Obama to bless a successor, he opted for his former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It was a bitter pill. ...access the full transcript here 👉 https://l.prageru.com/47EGZLs

There are two contemporary narratives of the Trump era. According to one, the 45th and 47th president of the United States, Donald J. Trump, is a right-wing autocrat who aspires to end the American republic. According to the other, he is saving the republic from left-wing extremism. Which version is more accurate? Sir Niall Ferguson, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford, explores this question. 📲 Watch our content ad-free on our app: https://prageru.onelink.me/3bas/vgyxvm79 Donate to PragerU: https://l.prageru.com/4jiAT85 Follow PragerU: Instagram ➡️ (https://www.instagram.com/prageru/) X ➡️ (https://twitter.com/prageru) Facebook ➡️ (https://www.facebook.com/prageru/) TikTok ➡️ (https://www.tiktok.com/@prageru) Transcript: Donald Trump: The MAGA President Presented by Niall Ferguson, One day in the future, historians will be struck by the contrast between two contemporary narratives of the Trump era. According to one narrative, the forty-fifth and forty-seventh president of the United States, Donald J. Trump, was a modern-day Caesar—an autocrat who, by ignoring constitutional constraints, aspired to end the American republic. According to the other narrative, this same man was a courageous tribune of the people who, by taking on corrupt and predatory elites, saved the republic. Which version is right? Let’s find out. Donald Trump was born on June 14, 1946, in Queens, New York City, the son of a successful real estate developer. After graduating from the Wharton School, Trump joined the family firm. A high-stakes risk-taker, Trump’s towers, casinos, and resorts generated remarkable quantities of cash, debt, and litigation, not to mention publicity. In 2004, the risk-taker gambled on a second career—as the host of the “reality” TV show The Apprentice. It made Trump a star. But it was his third career as a politician that ultimately made Trump the most famous person in the world. On June 16, 2015, Trump announced that he was seeking the Republican nomination for the presidency. Few people took him seriously. He had dabbled in politics before but had never run for any political office. Yet Trump struck a chord with his attacks on illegal immigration from Mexico and unfair trade with China. His unvarnished, unscripted style inspired a new populist political movement with the slogan “Make America Great Again”—MAGA. While the coastal elites had benefited from globalization, many Americans felt left behind. In this brash billionaire, with his viral tweets, they found a champion. The pundits and pollsters forecast victory for the Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton. They were wrong. True, Clinton won the popular vote, but Trump won the vote that mattered, the Electoral College: 304 to 227. A fractious coalition between his campaign team, the Republican establishment, and a succession of generals and businessmen, Trump’s first administration often seemed chaotic. But in terms of Trump’s core objectives, it was highly successful. On the campaign trail, he had promised to build a “big, beautiful wall” on the nation’s southern border. He succeeded metaphorically. In 2017, in just his first year as president, apprehensions at the U.S.-Mexico border dropped to a 46-year low. Thanks to Trump’s tax cuts and deregulation, real median household income rose significantly for the first time since 1999—by 10% between 2016 and 2019. When Trump took office, the Islamic State terrorist organization had overrun large parts of Syria and Iraq. Within two years, it was effectively wiped out. The Abraham Accords that Trump negotiated represented a geopolitical breakthrough in relations between Israel and the Arab countries. And by imposing tariffs, Trump pressured China into a trade deal that began to address the economic imbalances between the two countries. Yet to his opponents, Trump was a would-be dictator. The Democrats even claimed he was a pawn of Russian President Vladimir Putin. When that charge could not be substantiated, the Democrats impeached Trump on the ground that he had pressured Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden. The Senate acquitted Trump. ...access the full transcript here 👉 https://l.prageru.com/3WpwHJV

Michelle Thibeau served in the U.S. Army Special Operations Command in Afghanistan. As a woman and a soldier, she knows that there are many roles in the armed forces that women can and should fill. Is combat one of them? Do you think women belong in combat? Let us know what you think 👉 https://l.prageru.com/3KZKFjh 📲 Watch our content ad-free on our app: https://prageru.onelink.me/3bas/vgyxvm79 Donate to PragerU: https://l.prageru.com/4jiAT85 Follow PragerU: Instagram ➡️ (https://www.instagram.com/prageru/) X ➡️ (https://twitter.com/prageru) Facebook ➡️ (https://www.facebook.com/prageru/) TikTok ➡️ (https://www.tiktok.com/@prageru) Transcript: Do Women Belong in Combat? Presented by Michelle Thibeau Women do not belong in combat. I say this as a woman—and a soldier. I’ve seen war firsthand, in all its ugliness and brutality. In 2017, I served in the U.S. Army Special Operations Command in Afghanistan. My job was to engage with local women—something my male colleagues were discouraged from doing, because of religious and cultural barriers. That access was critical to our mission. I saw up close what our warfighters had to do to succeed, to survive, and to protect civilians. I was as close to combat as you could get. And I thank God I didn’t get any closer. I’m proud of my military service. There are many roles in the armed forces that women can and should fill. But combat is not one of them. Until recently, it was conventional wisdom not to put women on the front lines. The principle that combat is a male burden has been nearly universal across civilizations. There’s an obvious reason for this. Men are, on average, stronger, faster, and more capable of delivering— and withstanding—extreme violence. That’s not a stereotype. It’s basic physiology. And common sense tells us: a society that places women—the bearers of new life—on the front lines is not prioritizing its future. Yet in 2015, the Obama administration ordered the full integration of women into all military combat roles, including special operations and mixed-gender infantry units. At the time, many of us in uniform knew this was a mistake. And we had the data to prove it. A U.S. Marine Corps study that same year found that all-male units outperformed mixed-gender units in nearly every measurable category. Mixed units had slower times in obstacle courses. Women were six times more likely to suffer musculoskeletal injuries than men. Women took longer to evacuate wounded comrades to safety. Where male Marines could do single-person lifts, female Marines often had to revert to two-person drags, which were slower and less efficient. In war, those gaps aren’t theoretical—they’re fatal. Military experts, including those in the Israel Defense Forces, have identified additional concerns: in mixed-gender combat units, the Israelis found, male soldiers often shifted focus away from the mission to protect their female comrades — their natural instinct — even if it risked compromising mission goals. And there’s another obvious problem: As Anna Simons, Professor of Defense Analysis at the Naval Postgraduate School, observes: “Men and women have been each other’s most consistent distraction since the beginning of time. To pretend that we don’t know what will happen when men and women are thrown together for prolonged periods in emotionally intense situations defies common sense.” Preparing for battle and battle itself is stressful enough. Why would we want to introduce sexual tension into the mix? Not to mention the strain this places on supervising officers who now have to deal with sexual dynamics in addition to their traditional responsibilities. Does this sound like a strategy for mission success? But all these warnings were ignored. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta famously said, “If [women] can meet the qualifications for the job, then they should have the right to serve…” But when women couldn’t meet those standards, the response wasn’t to rethink the policy—it was to lower the standards. When two women graduated Ranger School in 2015, it was only after multiple attempts and what military insiders described as “unusual command interest.” At West Point, physical tests have employed gender-adjusted thresholds. In the Army Physical Fitness Test, male soldiers had to perform 84 push-ups in two minutes—women, just 42. ...access the full transcript here 👉 https://l.prageru.com/47epnWo

Barack Obama promised to fundamentally transform America. Over two terms in office, he did just that—on race, healthcare, and foreign policy. But was it change for the better? Carol Swain examines the impact of the 44th president and the legacy he left behind. 📲 Watch our content ad-free on our app: https://prageru.onelink.me/3bas/vgyxvm79 Donate to PragerU: https://l.prageru.com/4jiAT85 Follow PragerU: Instagram ➡️ (https://www.instagram.com/prageru/) X ➡️ (https://twitter.com/prageru) Facebook ➡️ (https://www.facebook.com/prageru/) TikTok ➡️ (https://www.tiktok.com/@prageru) Transcript: Barack Obama: Transforming America Presented by Carol Swain Shortly before Barack Obama was elected the forty-fourth president of the United States, he told an enthusiastic crowd of supporters that he wanted to “fundamentally” transform America. Over the next eight years, America found out what he meant. Three issues epitomized the transformation Obama had in mind. Race relations. Healthcare. And foreign policy. Let’s take each one in turn. Race Relations: Could it be that when Obama said he wanted to fundamentally transform America, he was talking about a post racial society where skin color didn’t matter? Indeed, as a biracial American, half-white, half-black, he seemed the perfect figure to make this a reality. But it was not to be. Instead, Obama’s actions fueled racial division in America. In July 2009, when a white police officer briefly arrested a black Harvard professor as a suspected burglar, Obama accused the police officer, a man with no history of bigotry, of racism. In July 2013, after a Hispanic volunteer security guard was acquitted of the murder of a young black man in Florida, Obama attributed the verdict to racism. And then, in August 2014, when a black teenager who had just robbed a convenience store was shot by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, Obama again charged racism. His own Justice Department later acquitted the officer of racial animus. Whereas in the decade leading up to Obama’s presidency, racial tensions had sharply declined, they were now inflamed by the man who so many Americans hoped would extinguish them. Healthcare: Where Bill Clinton had failed, Barack Obama would succeed. He would bring the United States closer to the “enlightened” nations of Europe, all of which had socialized their healthcare systems. Obama marshaled his rhetorical skills to achieve this goal. If he had to engage in outright falsehoods to get what he wanted, that was okay. “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor,” was one of his constant refrains. But it wasn’t true. Neither was his assertion that the program would save Americans thousands of dollars in healthcare costs. Despite his best efforts, Obama couldn’t sell his plan to a majority of the American people. It turned out that most of them liked the healthcare coverage they had. On Christmas Eve 2009, in the middle of the night, the Democrats rammed the 2,500-page Affordable Care Act through the Senate. Asked what was in the legislation, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi famously responded, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it…” Within a few years, 2,500 pages turned into 11,000 pages of new regulations, healthcare costs ballooned, and many people were forced to give up the doctor they trusted. But for Obama, it was all worth it: he had transformed the nation’s healthcare system. Foreign policy: Since the Iranian Revolution in 1979, American presidents have viewed Iran as a dangerous enemy. Obama believed he could transform this adversarial relationship. The centerpiece of Obama’s new policy would be the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, popularly known as the Iran Nuclear Deal. The key feature of the plan was to limit Iran’s ability to make a nuclear weapon for fifteen years. In exchange, Obama would lift sanctions and release $150 billion dollars of Iranian assets frozen in U.S. banks. The deal deeply unsettled many Americans, including some Democrats, and especially Israel and its supporters. First, a short-term infusion of billions of dollars — almost certainly to be used to fund Israel’s enemies Hamas and Hezbollah — posed immediate danger. Second, a nuclear-armed Iran — even fifteen years in the future — threatened the existence of Israel. When Israel’s leaders strongly objected to the agreement, Obama ignored them. Knowing he couldn’t get a treaty through the Senate, Obama issued an executive order to carry out his plan. A giant military plane soon landed in Tehran with $400 million dollars in cash. ...access the full transcript here 👉 https://l.prageru.com/4n6aeMF