Kamala Harris Is Back & Dividing Democrats, Trump Outsmarts Russia & China | 7/23/26 FIRST LOOK

[00:00:03][music] >> Hey everybody, I'm Dave Rubin and this is First Look. It's Thursday, July 23rd, 2026. We've got a packed show for [music] you today. President Trump inks a landmark 30-year nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia that puts [music] American companies front and center, locks out Russia and China, and strengthens US [music] influence over the kingdom's civilian nuclear program. Kamala Harris is being anointed the Democrats' [music] 2028 frontrunner in a new magazine profile, even though she hasn't declared. The party is deeply [music] divided, and some Democrats openly hope she runs so she can lose again.

[00:00:43]Therapists are increasingly [music] encouraging adults to cut off their parents in the name of self-care, fueling a wave of family estrangement [music] that critics say is destroying relationships and leaving people more depressed in the long run. Let's dive in. President Trump has formally approved a landmark civilian nuclear agreement with Saudi Arabia that will last 30 years and is estimated to be worth tens of billions of dollars. The deal is designed to give American companies the central role in developing Saudi Arabia's nuclear infrastructure while shutting out other foreign competitors, especially Russia and China. Trump greenlit the agreement late last week. Wright discussed the framework during his first overseas trip to the region back in April 2025.

[00:01:32]A key provision would allow US companies to build a uranium enrichment facility inside Saudi Arabia if a joint US-Saudi study determines the step is warranted.

[00:01:44]Administration officials argue this gives the US real influence over the program and a practical way to prevent it from being diverted for military purposes. Under the agreement, new power reactors and other nuclear technology would be supplied by American firms with only a secondary role possible for some foreign suppliers. Westinghouse Electric and its AP1000 reactor, which produces about 1,100 MW, enough to power a mid-size city or a major AI data center, stand to be among the biggest beneficiaries. As the reactor projects move forward, US and Saudi officials will conduct a two-year study on whether indigenous enrichment makes commercial sense. If the study concludes it is warranted, Americans would build the enrichment facility under a secretive black box arrangement that prevents the transfer of sensitive technology to Riyadh. If the United States objects after the study, the kingdom would be barred from enriching on its own or with any other foreign partner for 10 years.

[00:02:53]Trump officials say the American role insures enrichment stays peaceful and that spent fuel cannot be reprocessed into a bomb.

[00:03:03]Saudi officials have long argued the program is needed to develop a domestic nuclear industry that can draw on the kingdom's unproven uranium deposits, free up more oil for export, and boost revenues. The Saudis insist their intentions are peaceful, though Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman said in 2018 that if Iran ever acquires a nuclear weapon, Saudi Arabia would follow.

[00:03:29]Robert Einhorn, a former long-time senior State Department official who advised both Republican and Democratic administrations, put it this way: The agreement could help revitalize the US nuclear industry, strengthen US-Saudi ties, and deny Russia and China a strategically important role in the Saudi nuclear program. But unless it contains adequate constraints, including on enrichment, it could increase nuclear proliferation risks in the Middle East and beyond. Critics on the left are already sounding the alarm.

[00:04:05]Representative Brad Sherman of California said Congress should only approve the deal if Saudi Arabia commits never to enrich uranium or reprocess spent fuel. A president waging war to prevent nuclear proliferation in the Middle East should not facilitate proliferation just because US companies stand to make a profit, he wrote. Henry Sokolski of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center warned that whither goes Saudi Arabia, so goes the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, and Egypt. The idea that this will have a happy ending is delusional. Unlike the UAE, Saudi Arabia has rejected the so-called gold standard pledge never to enrich or reprocess. The Saudis also rejected the IAEA's additional protocol for more rigorous inspections. Trump officials counter that the separate agreement still provides adequate monitoring of US provided sites. The deal is expected to be submitted to Congress in the coming days. Blocking it would require a joint resolution and a 2/3 majority to override a potential presidential veto, an uphill climb. Some lawmakers previously pushed for an even tougher standard that would have required affirmative congressional approval. Then Senator Marco Rubio was among them. That effort never came to a vote. This agreement also differs sharply from the Biden approach. The previous administration was willing to discuss nuclear cooperation only if Saudi Arabia to relations with Israel. That path collapsed after the October 2023 Hamas attack and the subsequent war in Gaza.

[00:05:54]President Trump has continued to urge Saudi Arabia and other Islamic states to join the Abraham Accords, but he is not holding the nuclear deal hostage to that demand. At the same time, the White House is still pressing Iran to curtail its nuclear program and hand over its highly enriched uranium. Energy Secretary Wright summed it up. Rest assured, these agreements uphold the highest standards of nuclear safety and non-proliferation while relying on the world's best nuclear safety and non-proliferation while relying on the world's best nuclear technology and scientists designed right here in the United States. Thanks to President Trump, the American nuclear renaissance is underway and will deliver long-term benefits.

[00:06:46]Former Vice President Kamala Harris is being treated as the Democratic Party's 2028 frontrunner in a new New York magazine profile. Even though she is not formally declared and significant parts of her own party are openly skeptical or hostile to the idea of another Harris campaign.

[00:07:06]Looking at early polling alone, Harris holds a commanding lead. She is registering more than 35% support, roughly double what California Governor Gavin Newsom is pulling, and far ahead of Pete Buttigieg and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who barely cracked double digits. She walks in as the frontrunner. It is fairly obvious she is followed wherever she goes, one unnamed former Harris aide told the magazine, and I don't want to upset any narratives that any of the other candidates are pushing. But she comes in with 99% name ID, and everyone else is going to have to raise money and buy it. Another Harris supporter who claims to have spoken with her recently is now convinced she will jump in. Her mindset is that I should have won, and I am going to do it my way because my way would have won. And it was all these consultants that were telling me to take this position or that position, and it was their fault, the supporter said.

[00:08:06]Not everyone in the party is on board.

[00:08:08]Liz Monella, a former deputy finance chair for the Democrats, stopped short of blaming Harris for the 2024 loss to President Trump, but expressed real reservations. I think she has learned a lot from the mistakes she made, or I should say the campaign made in 2024.

[00:08:26]And I would love it, but can she go back to all of those people again and raise money? Will it all be just an autopsy of 2024?

[00:08:35]Others are far more blunt. Alex Hoffman, a donor facing strategist, said, "I hope she runs because then she will lose, and we will never have to hear from her again. She will never win an election at a national scale, never."

[00:08:50]Harris has been acting like a candidate.

[00:08:52]She declined to run for governor of California earlier this year. She has been vocally critical of President Trump, a steady presence for Democrats heading into the midterms, and has leaned into some of the party's most extreme positions, packing the Supreme Court and granting statehood to Washington D.C. and Puerto Rico. She has also been a regular at conferences and public discussions where her performances have been mixed and at times fell flat. The party never actually nominated her in 2024. She was installed after Joe Biden was forced out. Now, with nearly 4 years of hindsight, many Democrats are still debating whether recycling the same candidate is a path to victory or a guaranteed autopsy.

[00:09:37]A growing number of therapists are encouraging adult patients to cut off their parents in the name of mental health and self-care, and the results are tearing families apart. About 25% of the US population is estranged from a close relative at any given time, and 10% is estranged from a parent or child, according to research by Cornell family sociologist Karl Pillemer. Among some 7,000 estranged parents surveyed in April, 1/3 believed their adult child's therapist had influenced or recommended the decision to end the relationship.

[00:10:15]Shoshana Rubli, a 42-year-old freelance marketer, was shocked when her therapist advised her in only the second session to cut off all ties with her mother. The counselor had impressive credentials and had been recommended by someone she knew, so she followed the advice.

[00:10:34]>> [sighs] >> "It was an argument made from authority, so I followed it," she said.

[00:10:39]For decades, therapy focused on better communication and working through family issues. Now, a segment of the profession is flipping that approach and treating estrangement as a form of empowerment.

[00:10:51]Proponents argue that cutting off a relative deemed toxic or unsupportive protects mental health. Critics, including researchers who have studied relationships for decades, say it encourages self-centeredness, self-delusion, and the permanent destruction of families. Most therapists still agree that real physical or severe emotional abuse can justify a cut off.

[00:11:16]What has changed is the dramatically lower bar for what counts as abuse.

[00:11:22]We are in a culture where we emphasize fragility. Everything becomes trauma, and the solution increasingly is to split and leave, says William Doherty, a therapist and professor emeritus of family social science at the University of Minnesota. "But it should be the tragic exception that you cut off a parent or a loved one, not business as usual in therapy.

[00:11:46]Social media has poured gasoline on the trend. Users share stories of how going no contact improved their lives, while therapists and estrangement coaches offer quizzes, courses, and books with titles like no contact, no guilt." Peter Anderson, a licensed marriage and family therapist who helps families with estrangements, says patients often arrive already parroting online language. "A lot of therapists are taught to believe whatever the client is saying at face value. They're forming conclusions based on one person's account." Whitney Goodman, a Tampa therapist with more than 660,000 followers on social media, argues trauma is in the eye of the beholder. She rejects deference to parents and frames many ordinary parental flaws as reasons to cut contact. Critics counter that therapists should be questioning, not affirming. Patients are not always reliable narrators, especially when mental health issues are present and the therapist hears only one side. Jay Lebow of Northwestern University's Family Institute says he regularly sees people who were encouraged by previous therapists to sever ties. "You are not solving the right problem, which is the mental health crisis. And this is the most tragic part, you may be encouraging them to cut off their best source of support."

[00:13:17]There is no scientific evidence that separating from a close relative is inherently beneficial. Research shows that while people who initiate a cut off often feel temporary relief. They experience significantly higher rates of chronic unhappiness and depression over time, what he calls the exiter cost.

[00:13:37]Long-term damage can include broken relationships with siblings and grandchildren, and the possibility that a parent dies during the estrangement.

[00:13:46]Rubli's own story illustrates the cost.

[00:13:49]She had expected therapy to help her set better boundaries and improve communication. Instead, she stopped talking to her mother for 10 years.

[00:13:58]During that time, she married, lost two grandparents, and watched other relatives cut her off in anger. Only after having children of her own did she realize all parents have flaws and reach back out. Her mother was overjoyed.

[00:14:14]Rubli now deeply regrets following the therapist's advice.

[00:14:18]This is what happens when a culture of fragility meets an industry that increasingly treats ordinary family friction as trauma requiring permanent exile. Real abuse is one thing. Treating every imperfect parent as disposable is something else entirely, and the long-term human cost is becoming impossible to ignore.

[00:14:43]And that's your first look this Thursday. Quick recap. President Trump locks in a major nuclear partnership with Saudi Arabia that puts American industry and American safeguards at the center. Democrats are already circling Kamala Harris as their 2028 favorite, despite deep internal doubts and her 2024 defeat. And a growing therapy trend is pushing adults to sever ties with their parents, leaving broken families and higher rates of long-term unhappiness in its wake. We'll keep following all of it. I'm Dave Rubin.

[00:15:18]Thanks for starting your day with First Look. See you tomorrow.

[00:15:26]>> [music]