The Brief | Iran Says It's Not Talking. Trump Says Iran Sent a "Present."
Also: The DHS deal collapses before it even exists, SCOTUS argues over feet and border walls, and the FBI opens an investigation on Kent who is willing to testify for Robinson
It’s Wednesday!
Some quick housekeeping!
There will be no Thursday episode of Rivera and Reeves while Rachel is traveling. BUT! Good news is that we will be doing Saturday’s UnFiltered LIVE open for everyone. So if you've been wanting to join us for an UnFiltered episode, this Saturday at 11 am EST is your chance! Exclusively on Substack!
Also, I have been working hard to get the podcast audio dialed in. I think I finally got it. Apparently, a new mic designed for big mouths was the secret.
I am the one with the big mouth, btw.
IKYMI
The Brief runs Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. If someone forwarded this to you, you can fix that problem at the bottom of this email.
Let’s get into it.
In today’s Brief:
Trump handed Iran a 15-point peace plan while simultaneously deploying thousands of paratroopers — diplomacy, apparently, works best with a loaded backup
The DHS deal everyone was celebrating Monday night is already dead on arrival, opposed by Republicans, Democrats, the White House, and possibly the laws of physics
The Supreme Court spent Tuesday debating whether a migrant standing in Mexico with their foot at the border has technically “arrived in” the United States — yes, this is real
Joe Kent said he’d testify in defense of Charlie Kirk’s alleged assassin — and now the FBI is investigating him for allegedly leaking classified information
New Mexico hit Meta with a historic $375M verdict over child exploitation, the first time a jury has ruled on these claims
Iran: The Deal That Everyone Wants and Nobody Will Admit To
Here is where we stand on day 25 of the Iran war: The United States has struck more than 9,000 military targets inside Iran since February 28. Dozens of regime leaders are dead. The Strait of Hormuz — through which about a fifth of the world’s oil passes — remains a flashpoint. Gas prices are still painful.
And yet: Trump handed Tehran a 15-point peace plan via Pakistan on Tuesday, and he’s publicly claiming Iran has already agreed to the biggest demand.
“They’ve agreed,” Trump said of his nuclear ask. “They will never have a nuclear weapon. They’ve agreed to that.”
Tehran’s official response: these reports of negotiations are “fake news” designed to calm oil markets.
Someone is lying. Or both sides are managing their domestic audiences. Probably both. Have you seen the propaganda Iran is putting out?
The framework, reported by the New York Post and confirmed by multiple outlets, demands Iran dismantle its nuclear program entirely — including Natanz, Isfahan, and Fordo — hand enriched uranium to the IAEA, abandon its proxy network (Hezbollah, the Houthis, all of it), and limit its missile program. In exchange: sanctions relief and U.S. help building a civilian nuclear program. Pakistan, Egypt, and Turkey are all playing intermediary roles.
VP JD Vance has emerged as a central figure in the off-ramp discussions, alongside Rubio, Witkoff, and Kushner. And Trump announced Tuesday that Iran sent a “significant” oil-related “present” — almost certainly a gesture around the Strait of Hormuz — as a sign of good faith.
Meanwhile, the military buildup is accelerating. The Pentagon is expected to deploy between 3,000 and 4,000 soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division, one of the military’s premier rapid-response forces, capable of deploying a battalion within 18 hours. The division’s command element has already been ordered forward. There are already 50,000 U.S. troops in the region. That number is growing.
Overnight update: Fox News confirmed orders have been given to deploy the 82nd Airborne command element. No final orders have yet been issued to the full Immediate Response Force brigade.
Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt was blunt: “Operation Epic Fury continues unabated.” This is not a contradiction — it’s a strategy. You negotiate from strength, or you don’t negotiate at all.
The one question nobody’s asking loudly enough: Saudi Crown Prince MBS has reportedly been privately pushing Trump to continue the war, calling this a “historic opportunity to remake the Middle East.” What does Trump promise Riyadh if a deal actually gets done?
The DHS Shutdown: The Deal That Wasn’t
Senate Republicans walked out of the White House Monday night feeling good about a two-step plan: fund DHS now minus ICE deportation operations, then move ICE funding through budget reconciliation later with zero Democratic votes needed. Markwayne Mullin was confirmed 54-45 as the new DHS secretary, and sworn in. Things felt like they were moving.
By Tuesday afternoon, it was all falling apart.
Senate Democrats, led by Chuck Schumer, said the deal still doesn’t include ICE reforms they’ve been demanding — not just defunding — and drafted a counterproposal. House conservatives announced opposition before the deal was even formally announced. Sen. Rick Scott called it a “pipe dream.” And Trump himself, who blessed the deal the night before, told reporters Tuesday he was “pretty much not happy with” anything being negotiated.
So: a plan endorsed by the White House, opposed by the White House, opposed by Democrats, opposed by House conservatives, opposed by at least one prominent Senate Republican. Outstanding.
This is now day 38. TSA officers are working without pay. Airport security lines are breaking records. A Canadian passenger jet collided with a fire truck on the LaGuardia runway on Sunday, killing both pilots. ICE agents are now stationed at airports in place of TSA — Tom Homan says ICE will arrest “criminals,” not screen bags. Steve Bannon is calling the airport deployment a “test run” for the 2026 midterms, which is a thing he actually said, so of course, legacy media is running with it.
The Easter recess starts at the end of this week. If Congress leaves without a deal, they leave the airports exactly like this for two more weeks.
Here’s the real accountability angle: Democrats have blocked DHS funding for 38 days over their refusal to fund ICE deportations. The airports aren’t breaking down because of Trump’s immigration policies. They’re breaking down because Senate Democrats decided the leverage was worth it. The political press has largely avoided framing it that way.
SCOTUS: What Does “Arrives In” Actually Mean?
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Noem v. Al Otro Lado, the case over whether the government can practice “metering,” turning migrants back at the southern border before they physically step onto U.S. soil.
The Obama administration invented the tool. Trump’s first term expanded it. Biden killed it. Now Trump wants it back.
The legal question sounds simple: Does a migrant stopped on the Mexican side of the border have the right to apply for asylum? Federal law says any noncitizen who “arrives in” the United States can claim asylum. The government says a person in Mexico hasn’t arrived. The challengers say migrants approaching a port of entry are close enough to count.
Conservative justices appeared inclined toward the government’s position. Justice Kavanaugh raised the obvious perverse incentive: under the current 9th Circuit ruling, migrants who illegally cross the border onto U.S. soil have more asylum rights than migrants who do everything right and wait in line at a port of entry. Why would Congress create that system?
The oral argument itself got almost absurdist — Justice Gorsuch asked whether someone at the top of a border wall has better asylum rights than someone at the bottom. Chief Justice Roberts asked about people at the back of a long line. Justice Sotomayor offered that maybe a hand or a nose through the fence might count as “arriving.”
Justice Jackson tried multiple times to get the court to toss the case as moot since metering isn’t currently in use. It didn’t land.
Solicitor General John Sauer’s position is commonsense: “A person does not ‘arrive in the United States’ if he is stopped in Mexico.” A ruling is expected by June. Given the questioning, expect the court to hand the executive branch back a critical tool for managing border surges, without a judge in California being able to kill it.
Joe Kent - No Jurisdiction. No Evidence. Willing to Testify for Defense.
Joe Kent — the former Director of the National Counterterrorism Center who resigned over his opposition to the Iran war — has spent the past week publicly claiming the FBI blocked him from investigating a “foreign nexus” in Charlie Kirk’s assassination. In an interview with Michael Schellenberger, he says he’d willingly testify for the defense of Tyler Robinson, the man who confessed to killing Kirk in a text message to his romantic partner. Kent’s theory: the FBI had “tunnel vision,” Robinson may not have acted alone, and someone in government suppressed the leads.
The FBI’s rebuttal: Kent “had no authority” to probe Kirk’s assassination and was blocked from files he had no statutory right to access. In other words, he wasn’t an investigator — he was an interloper.
Overnight update: The Washington Examiner and others confirmed the FBI has opened a formal investigation into Kent for allegedly improperly sharing classified information. Kent’s response: the investigation is a “counternarrative” meant to intimidate him into silence.
Andrew Kolvet — one of Kirk’s closest advisors — pushed back hard this week, calling Kent’s claims “conspiracy garbage“ and saying more evidence will be presented to the public. This was just a day before Kolvet dropped something that makes this story considerably more uncomfortable.
According to Kolvet, he shared private screenshots of text messages he had with Charlie Kirk directly with Kent. Kent allegedly encouraged Kolvet to go public with those messages. Kolvet declined. About two weeks later, those same private messages appeared on Candace Owens’s show. Kolvet says he doesn’t know whether Kent passed them to Owens, but the timeline speaks for itself, and he’s not letting it go unaddressed.
That’s worth sitting with for a moment. The man who claims to be pursuing justice for Charlie Kirk allegedly encouraged the publication of Kirk’s private messages — messages Kolvet, one of Kirk’s closest friends, chose not to release out of respect — and then those messages ended up broadcast to a national audience anyway, to further a theory that Kirk’s own inner circle calls “conspiracy garbage.” Kent also got into a public clash with Mark Levin over the broader theory.
Let’s be clear about what Kent himself admitted in the interview: he has “nothing specific” on Israeli involvement. His own words. He had no jurisdiction. He had no evidence. What he is offering the defense of Tyler Robinson is an “alternative suspect” theory — the idea that law enforcement had tunnel vision — which is a real legal argument under the Brady doctrine. But here’s the practical danger: if Kent takes that stand and a jury is persuaded that the investigation was compromised or incomplete, it could create reasonable doubt that derails the prosecution of the man who confessed to the murder in a text message. You don’t have to believe in a foreign conspiracy to understand what that outcome would mean.
Kirk was assassinated. A man confessed. The trial will determine what the jury makes of all this noise. But the spectacle of a former counterterrorism official — now under FBI investigation for allegedly leaking classified information — publicly undermining the prosecution of his former boss’s alleged killer, while privately encouraging the distribution of that boss’s personal messages, is a story that deserves a lot more scrutiny than it’s getting.
In my Feed
Legacy media cosplay as podcasters
Quick Rundown
Taliban releases U.S. hostage Dennis Coyle. The 64-year-old Colorado academic had been held in near-solitary confinement in Kabul for 421 days. The Taliban released him as a goodwill gesture for Eid. Secretary Rubio confirmed his release Tuesday; Coyle arrived in the UAE within hours. Two Americans — Mahmoud Habibi and the remains of Paul Overby — remain in Taliban custody.
New Mexico jury hits Meta with a $375M verdict. A jury found Meta violated state consumer protection law by knowingly enabling child sexual exploitation on Facebook and Instagram — 75,000 violations at $5,000 each. Meta plans to appeal. It’s the first time a jury has reached this kind of verdict against the company. A separate Los Angeles jury is still deliberating in a social media mental health case against Meta and YouTube. A second New Mexico phase trial on public nuisance claims is set for May.
Delta yanked Congress’s dedicated travel service line. During the DHS shutdown, which has airport security lines hitting record lengths, Delta suspended its special assistance desk for members of Congress. The Senate had quietly voted earlier to end its practice of letting lawmakers skip TSA security lines. Small justice.
Let’s Talk About It
Two questions on my mind this week. First: Is the Iran peace-plan-plus-troop-buildup combination a sign that Trump is negotiating in genuine good faith, or is the "deal talk" a diplomatic cover for a deeper military escalation that Saudi Arabia is quietly cheering on? And second — on Kent: is he a genuine whistleblower being silenced by an FBI that doesn't want scrutiny of its own investigation, or is he someone so convinced of his own theory that he's willing to risk letting a confessed killer walk free to prove it?
Drop your thoughts in the comments. And if you’re not already subscribed, share this with someone who deserves better news coverage.
The Brief publishes Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. Forward to someone who needs to understand what’s actually happening.
Couple things that are puzzling to me…Who told Andrew he could trust Joe? If Joe wasn’t an investigator (per the FBI rebuttal above), why did Andrew give him the text grab so he could pursue leads? That doesn’t make sense to me.
The part where you talk about Joe is undermining his former boss’s murder investigation….did Joe work for Charlie?
Also, Andrew said “We’ve done this quietly behind the scenes with countless items.” I’m wondering if he means he’s given Joe info countless times. If so, that would seem to me that Joe was an investigator rather than an interloper.