Apparently, election interference doesn't always come with a hacked voting machine. Sometimes it comes with a gas receipt.

$2,000.

That's the estimated cost the Iran war has already added to the average American household, according to an estimate discussed in this episode from Moody's Analytics economist Mark Zandi.

And Steveo has a question: What if some of that economic pressure is being used to influence America's elections?

In this episode of Seasoned & Unfiltered, we're looking at the Iran conflict, rising gasoline and diesel prices, the Strait of Hormuz, and allegations that Iranian leaders may be deliberately increasing pressure on energy markets ahead of the November 2026 midterm elections.

Higher oil prices don't just hurt at the pump. They affect trucking, farming, shipping, groceries, business expenses, and just about everything else Americans pay for.

But here's where things get interesting.

Could Iran be using attacks on shipping and disruptions to energy markets to influence American public opinion? Or are we looking at ordinary wartime strategy being interpreted through an election-year lens?

Steveo examines the reported timing of attacks, Iranian political messaging, energy-market reactions, and the difference between a legitimate concern about foreign influence and an allegation that still needs proof.

And yes, he gives the other side its fair shot.

Because wars affect economies. Economies affect elections. That alone doesn't prove election interference.

But if a foreign government deliberately times economic disruption to influence voters, shouldn't Americans know about it?

From the Strait of Hormuz to the grocery store, from Tehran to Washington, this episode asks who really pays when international conflicts become political weapons.

Spoiler alert: It usually isn't the politicians.

Experience leads the conversation. The noise stays at the door.

Welcome to Seasoned & Unfiltered with Steveo.

Stay seasoned. Stay spicy. Keep it unfiltered.

What do you think? Can deliberately manipulating energy prices amount to foreign election interference, or is that simply part of wartime economics?

Subscribe, share your thoughts, and join the conversation.

#SeasonedAndUnfiltered #Iran #ElectionInterference #GasPrices #MidtermElections #EnergyPrices

00:00 — The Election Interference Nobody's Calling Interference

00:22 — $2,000: What the Iran War Is Costing American Families

02:15 — Why $6 Diesel Affects Everyone

03:55 — Is Iran Targeting the Midterm Elections?

05:29 — Keeping Oil Prices High on Purpose?

06:04 — What We Know vs. What We Suspect

07:24 — Why the Strait of Hormuz Matters

08:27 — How Attacks Can Raise Prices Before Shortages

09:19 — The October Attacks and Election Timing

10:46 — Iran's Messaging to American Voters

12:17 — Can Economic Pressure Influence an Election?

13:42 — The Other Side: It's War, Not Election Interference

15:39 — When Military Pressure Becomes Political Strategy

17:15 — Why This Deserves the Same Scrutiny as Cyber Interference

18:55 — What This Actually Costs American Families

20:14 — Energy Security Is National Security

21:49 — Who Really Pays for Washington's Decisions?

22:28 — A Word From Angel Pillow

23:08 — Could Economic Pain Become a Political Weapon?

24:14 — Not Every Price Increase Is a Conspiracy

25:43 — What Voters Should Research Before Election Day

27:37 — Is Iran Trying to Influence the Midterms?

28:25 — Sometimes Interference Arrives at the Gas Pump

29:03 — Stay Seasoned, Stay Spicy, Keep It Unfiltered

Apparently, donating a few dollars to a political campaign might get you more attention than you bargained for.

639,000 Americans.

That's the number at the center of this episode of Seasoned & Unfiltered, and Steveo has a few questions.

According to findings outlined in an October 2026 memo from Senator Chuck Grassley, Jack Smith's Arctic Frost investigation reportedly obtained information involving hundreds of thousands of Republican donors, voters, and supporters.

We're talking names, home addresses, employment information, political donations, and potentially sensitive financial records.

And some of those donations? As little as one dollar.

So here's the question: When does investigating a politician turn into collecting information on the people who support that politician?

Steveo digs into the allegations surrounding the Justice Department, FBI, Jack Smith's special counsel investigation, and the questions being raised about government overreach, the Fourth Amendment, political privacy, and constitutional protections.

But there's an important distinction.

A government investigation obtaining a database does not automatically mean everyone in that database was individually investigated or surveilled. The congressional findings raise serious questions, but they are not final court rulings.

And that's exactly why Steveo wants answers.

Why did some records reportedly stretch back to 2005? Who had access to the information? How long can the government keep it? And would Americans be comfortable with the same thing happening to donors from the opposite political party?

Because today it might be somebody else's information.

Tomorrow, it might be yours.

No political party should get a free pass when it comes to constitutional rights.

Welcome to Seasoned & Unfiltered with Steveo, where experience leads the conversation, the questions don't get watered down, and nobody gets to hide behind a convenient talking point.

Stay seasoned. Stay spicy. Keep it unfiltered.

What do you think? Should federal investigators have to provide greater justification when obtaining large databases of political donors and voters? Tell us in the comments.

#SeasonedAndUnfiltered #JackSmith #ArcticFrost #GovernmentOverreach #FourthAmendment #PoliticalPrivacy

00:00 — They Weren't Just Investigating Trump?

00:15 — 639,000 Americans: The Number Behind Arctic Frost

00:57 — What Information Was Reportedly Collected?

01:35 — What Grassley's Memo Actually Establishes

02:15 — The October 2026 Congressional Findings

03:51 — When Does an Investigation Go Too Far?

04:49 — Why Were Records Going Back to 2005?

06:48 — Ordinary Americans Caught in the Data

08:05 — Bank Accounts, Addresses and $5 Donations

10:16 — Congressional Phone Records Enter the Picture

11:09 — The Other Side: Does a Database Prove Surveillance?

12:39 — A Word From Angel Pillow

13:58 — Show Us the Legal Justification

14:48 — The Fourth Amendment and Government Limits

15:20 — Who Has Your Information and How Long?

16:58 — Today It's Republicans. Tomorrow It's Who?

18:44 — When Legal Investigations Become Government Overreach

19:15 — Senator Blackburn's Lawsuit

20:05 — What Should Congress Do Next?

21:23 — Could a $5 Donation Put Your Data in a Federal File?

22:25 — Should the Government Be Allowed to Keep It?

23:35 — What We Know, What We Don't and Why Oversight Matters

24:14 — Stay Seasoned, Stay Spicy, Keep It Unfiltered

Watch and listen to Seasoned & Unfiltered

These are the show's regular links. The new episode's individual YouTube URL hasn't been provided yet, so I've linked the show search rather than an unrelated episode.

YouTube: Find Seasoned & Unfiltered

Spotify: Listen on Spotify

Apple Podcasts: Watch or listen on Apple Podcasts

Amazon Music: Listen on Amazon Music

Apparently God is nonbinary. Or maybe that wasn't quite what he meant. Depends on which interview you're watching.

Welcome back to Seasoned & Unfiltered, where Steveo has a few questions for Texas Democrat James Talarico—and he's brought the receipts.

In 2021, Talarico made headlines for saying God is nonbinary and arguing that modern science recognizes more than two biological sexes. Now, as he faces Republican Ken Paxton in the Texas Senate race, he's acknowledging that some of his earlier statements missed the mark.

So what changed? His beliefs? His understanding? Or just the audience he's trying to win over?

Steveo digs into Talarico's original statements, his more recent explanations, and the intersection of Christianity, transgender issues, school sports, and political messaging.

But this isn't just about a few controversial sound bites.

We also examine Talarico's actual record in the Texas Legislature, including education funding, childcare, prescription drug costs, and juvenile justice. And yes, Ken Paxton's controversies deserve scrutiny too.

Because here's a novel idea: Maybe we should judge politicians by what they've said, what they've done, and what they're promising now.

Imagine that.

Whether you're Republican, Democrat, independent, or just tired of politicians explaining why their own words apparently don't mean what they sounded like, this conversation is for you.

Seasoned by experience. Served unfiltered.

Subscribe, share your thoughts, and tell Steveo: Was this an honest clarification—or a politically convenient makeover?

#SeasonedAndUnfiltered #JamesTalarico #KenPaxton #TexasPolitics #TexasSenate #FaithAndPolitics

⏱️ YouTube chapters

00:00 — James Talarico: Faith, Gender & Politics

01:39 — Who Is James Talarico?

02:34 — Wait… God Is Nonbinary?

03:51 — Theology or Political Theater?

05:19 — Now He Says He Missed the Mark

06:58 — Did His Beliefs Change or Just His Message?

09:01 — Transgender Students, Sports & Faith

10:42 — The Six Sexes Controversy

12:18 — Six Then, Two Now. Which Is It?

13:15 — Political Cleanup on Aisle Six

15:22 — When Christianity Becomes Political Messaging

17:14 — Being Provocative Has a Price

18:55 — What Has Talarico Actually Accomplished?

20:18 — The Ken Paxton Problem

21:59 — A Word From Angel Pillow

24:26 — Compassion, Policy & Accountability

25:30 — Should Politicians Be Judged by Their Past?

28:18 — Clarification or Campaign Makeover?

28:45 — Talarico's Actual Legislative Record

31:16 — The Progressive Policies Behind the Messaging

32:00 — Steveo's Take: Talarico vs. Paxton

32:56 — Stay Seasoned, Stay Spicy, Stay Unfiltered

YouTube extras

Thumbnail headline: GOD IS WHAT NOW?!

I would depict a large, illustrated Texas Capitol with a church stained-glass window behind it, a dramatic quotation mark surrounding the phrase “GOD IS NONBINARY?”, and a smaller stamped line reading “HE SAID WHAT HE SAID.” Keep the same cream, burgundy, navy, and distressed editorial illustration style as your other S&U thumbnails.

Pinned comment: