Brad Gerstner: Trump Brokers Gaza Peace Deal, National Guard in Chicago, OpenAI/AMD, AI Roundtripping, Gold Rally

The episode opens with the hosts' usual self-promotion and ribbing. One host jokes that each new high in the Uber and Robinhood share prices makes them more "insufferable", and another credits Robinhood's rally to "the crypto policies of the Trump administration." The reply concedes the point only partly: "Yeah. It's fair. Fair. It's half of it." That leads to a jab about a "typical liberal" who benefits from policies and then trashes them, and the host answers by calling themselves an "independent moderate."

Brad, the "fifth bestie", is welcomed back after a long absence. He lists what has happened since his last appearance in teasing terms: a market crash after other hosts' calls, the crypto industry being saved from "prison and certain bankruptcy," and a colleague moving to Texas after becoming "tilted with Democrats." He also mentions a "$5,000,000,000 drawdown" for himself over that period. The conversation then turns to the news.

The first topic is the Israel–Hamas ceasefire. President Trump announced it on a Wednesday, the day after the second anniversary of the October 7 attacks, as the first phase of a multistage peace deal. The framing sets out the human cost: most of Gaza destroyed, 2,300,000 residents displaced, and, according to the Gaza health ministry, over 67,000 Palestinians killed. The speaker acknowledges that "some people will debate" that figure. The deal is described as based on Trump's peace plan, which the White House published the previous week, and the Israeli government was expected to vote on it the day of recording.

As one host summarizes it, the first phase includes a ceasefire to end active fighting, unrestricted aid into Gaza, the release of all remaining Israeli hostages, the release of 2,000 Palestinian prisoners by Israel, and the start of an Israeli troop withdrawal. The same host adds a caution:

And The Middle East has a way of disappointing you. Sometimes these deals don't stick, but based on everything we understand to be the case right now, this appears to be a big breakthrough

Later, a host cites Polymarket as showing a 90% chance that all Israeli hostages will be returned by the end of the month. The same host says getting aid to people suffering in Gaza "would also be nice to see."

The main explanation offered for the breakthrough is that the president was willing to "cajole and coerce and use pressure with respect to both sides of the conflict." To support this, the discussion turns to Aaron David Miller, described as a longtime diplomat who advised Republican and Democratic administrations on Middle East negotiations for about three decades. The speaker quotes Miller directly:

Donald Trump has demonstrated a degree of will unlike any other president, Republican or Democrat. He has pressed an Israeli prime minister in a way that none of his predecessors have ever done on an issue that that prime minister considers vital to his political survival

The host links this to a 2005 article by Miller titled "Israel's Lawyer." In it, as described, Miller criticized earlier US efforts, including his own, for representing Israel rather than acting as an objective negotiator, and argued that the US might achieve more if it were seen as an honest broker. The host reads Trump's approach as that kind of even-handedness: pressuring Netanyahu as well as Hamas, and warning that "all hell would break loose" if Hamas did not agree.

The host also notes that credit is coming from usual critics, naming the New York Times and the historian John Meacham on MSNBC. Meacham is singled out because he "is frequently criticizing president Trump as being a fascist or having authoritarian tendencies," yet still acknowledged that Trump had done "the seemingly impossible."

Asked what the region might look like after peace, another host starts with uncertainty ("Nobody knows") and then gives an economic argument. In this view, Gulf states hold a resource, oil, that is becoming less valuable over time. Oil left in the ground adds nothing to a country's balance sheet, so the faster it is monetized, the sooner proceeds can go into other investments and services for citizens. Waiting carries a cost because alternatives are arriving: abundant electricity from natural gas and solar now, and from nuclear within a ten-to-twenty-year window. Together these will "diminish the net long bid to oil."

The conclusion follows: instability prevents a full focus on monetization, while stability lets these states concentrate on it. The speaker calls this healthy because it "starts to create market driven incentives." The same speaker praises Jared Kushner, citing an Ackman tweet that in one week Kushner did "the largest LBO ever" and also helped negotiate Middle East peace.

Another host adds observations from trips to the region. Gulf states, this host says, are trying to diversify into private equity, solar, renewables, AI, sports team ownership, venture capital, tourism and new cities. All of that depends on attracting outside capital, which is hard if the region seems unstable or dangerous. Brad agrees that safety and security are preconditions: "You don't have any economic growth in the region unless you have that."

Brad sets the deal in a broader frame:

I think we might call Trump, like, the moonshot presidency.

The list of moonshots given is China, AI, reindustrialization, India–Pakistan, Ukraine–Russia and the Middle East. The speaker also notes that Hillary Clinton said she would nominate Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize if he brought peace between Ukraine and Russia. Borrowing Silicon Valley's language, the argument is that moonshots are high-risk, high-reward efforts most people avoid because they will probably fail. Given October 7, chaos in Syria, attacks from Yemen and escalations "fueled by Iran," the region could have fallen into all-out war. The speaker credits the president, Witkoff and Kushner with avoiding that outcome and lists results: Iran "decapitated," Syria brought "into the fold," a possible expansion of the Abraham Accords, and now this signing.

Drawing on a trip taken during the president's visit, the speaker says Trump is "respected as a strong leader and liked" in the capitals they visited. The speaker argues that if the deal holds, Witkoff, Kushner and the president all deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. Another host sets a lower bar: "If even 80% of it works out, I think it's worthy of a peace prize."

The panel then looks ahead. A host mentions rumors of a China deal at the end of the month or the next month, possibly addressing Taiwan through something like strategic ambiguity, and a chance of a Ukraine–Russia settlement. Together with Gaza, these would make a "trifecta" of the three biggest hotspots. The host adds that getting even two of them "would be great for humanity."