Senator Eric Schmitt: Exposing the Biggest Censorship Scandal in US History

25:05In any event, in these weekly IC meetings, and a lot of the evidence has been destroyed because they're using that disappearing tool teleport in any event. In these weekly meetings, we now know that they were warning the social networks be on the lookout for a Russian disinformation campaign in which Hunter Biden is accused of something. And so they for months were priming the social networks to view any story, any revelations about Hunter Biden as being Russian disinformation. Now why were they doing that? In fact, there was at one point, there was what was called a quote unquote table top exercise were all the heads of trust and safety of these social networks were brought, I think they're brought to the Aspen Institute and they literally ran a tabletop exercise where they said, okay, two weeks before the election, the Russians are going to do an op -o dump on Hunter Biden what's your response to that going to be?

26:01And where they all ended up is that they would censor the story. I mean, this is like crazy or well -earned stuff. In this sense, for just a steel manate, for them to want to do the right thing if the FBI is telling him it's Russian disinformation. Oh, I don't blame the social networks. That's the only point I'm trying to make. They believe in Zuckerberg, where I'm digging. Remember when Zuckerberg went on Rogan and he said, the reason why we censored that story is because the FBI had told us to. Most people in that situation would have believed the FBI. All three of them. The point is though that the FBI, again, they could have investigated the crimes on the laptop.

26:37They could have sat on the laptop and done nothing. That's not what they did instead. said they began this campaign to discredit the eventual revelations. What happened to those individuals at the FBI? I'm curious if you can get to that as well, who were involved in all this, where they ever brought up on charges. No, and that's who they are. There needs to be accountability here because I also think it's important to point out that so take SISA, which is the cyber security infrastructure security agency. No one's ever heard of it. It was created effectively to protect infrastructure from cyber attacks.

27:10In that era when Trump was present underground, they work on under the guise of Russian disinformation, what's called the election integrity project. So they work with Stanford, they work with University of Washington, to Flag, post, the work with social media companies. Then when you get into COVID, they just flip the switch and turn it on any, you know, if you're questioning the efficacy of the vaccine or you're questioning the efficacy of masks, they turn that around in the American people too. So part of the point that's outlined in the book, last line of defense, which you can order right now in Amazon.

27:40The part of the point was exposing all this was, this was a Leviathan. This wasn't just like one person making a phone call. This was all these agencies that were lined up with the regime's narrative. And then working and coercing and threatening social media companies, you will take this down or there will be consequences. And so, you know, the CDC, I mentioned the CDC, what were they doing? The government went to them and said, tell us the phrases that you want us to flag and take down and then we will work with social media companies effectively right to go do that. And so the FBI was involved in this, Cecil was involved with this, the CDC was involved with this.

28:18And then of course when we had the opportunity to take Anthony Fauci's deposition in NIH, that was mind blowing. It's only the second time his deposition was taken and we find out all the links that which he went to to undermine people like by the way, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, who was a plaintiff in Missouri versus Biden with me, to undermine his efforts to say things like, well, natural immunity is kind of a thing still. I mean, they tried to take down this guy's career in anybody like that who would just sort of question anything other than what Anthony Fauci said. So it really was a time that was wild and crazy and we can't ever let happen again.

28:56That's the sort of the point. And for me, as you guys, I know, this is a long, I told Jason first time a long time on the show now. The first amendment really is the beating heart of the Constitution. One of the great tests of this American experiment is our ability to tolerate people's point of view or their expression of a point of view that we vehemently disagree with even if we think it's dangerous. That's really a big part of what this whole thing is about. What you saw during COVID in particular was people who never should have this power were exercising in ways that you would have thought was from another country.

29:33You know what I mean? Like this couldn't happen here, but it was happening here. I don't know if you remember the FOIL lady. Literally the person who was supposed to be policing and making sure that things are on the up and up at the CDC was teaching them allegedly how to use hacker speak or their personal email addresses to subvert freedom of information requests. I mean, I'll put a legially in front of it, but I think this was all, you know, discoverable and it was in the emails. She just taught people how to lie and how to subvert foyer requests. So when you start saying, or well, and it does feel like this absolute power has that ability to absolutely come up.

30:13You know, Eric mentioned the NGOs that are part of the saliva. I think that is a really important part of it, because I think that one of the ways that the Biden administration was able to kind of create cover for the censorship they wanted, it's the kind of launder those censorship requests through some of these NGOs in addition to using the FBI and the IC and their connections to trust and safety. One NGO in particular I want to talk about or ask about is Hamilton 68. Did you look at this at all Eric or remind me which one Hamilton 68 is? The reason I wanted to talk about this one is this idea of Russian disinformation because Hamilton 68 was another one of these groups.

30:51This is all exposed in that type Bs reporting where it was set up by another former FBI official named Clint Watts You know these former FBI guys are are kind of all over and they claimed that they were tracking 600 or so Russian disinformation accounts or bots and they claimed to know Which accounts these were and they would put out stories that whenever there was a story that Democrats didn't like, they would accuse the Russians of being behind it amplifying that story. And this was the source for thousands of MSNBC stories, thousands of CNN reports and so on, claiming that the Russians were involved in our politics, they were engaging in disformation.

31:34Well, why is this relevant? Well during the Twitter files, we found out there was a UL Roth, you mentioned it was the head of trust and safety and definitely not a conservative. They were correspondence inside of Twitter saying, hey, we looked at their so -called API, and these are just regular accounts. And he said, basically, this is all bullshit. I mean, I think he used that word, bullshit. In other words, the whole idea they were tracking the Russian accounts was just total nonsense. These were, you know, it was just a random smattering of some more conservative accounts, some were Canadian accounts, they were just random accounts.

32:05And so any time they needed to oppose conservative opinion on an issue, they would just supposedly point to this Hamilton 68 dashboard. Hamilton 68 created this dashboard that's supposedly showed this vast Russian influence campaign. It all ended up being nonsense. Well, I think it totally gave it up. I think there's a long track record of the Russians hacking, including the RNC recently. So, you know, I do think you are painting a very one -sided picture here, Saks. Maybe it's all bullshit. You think the Russians are not hacking far an adversary at all. You don't believe any of it. Russia's got a lot of good hackers in it and I'm sure they have cyber operations and things like that.

32:46But again, that's a little different than saying that the Russians are heavily involved in our elections. I believe that that was largely a made up story. Now, look, do I want to say that no Russian ever was involved in some sort of operation? I'm not going to say that, but we know Hamilton 68 was total nonsense. In fact, it was worse than that. It was a hoax. It was a hoax. and for years, it was the basis for thousands of stories that the Russians were interfering in our politics. We also know that the Steel Dossier was a hoax and that was the whole basis once laundered through the FBI and that whole investigation that somehow the Russians interfered in the 2016 election.

33:22So when you start to peel away all these bogus accusations, Jason, yeah, I don't really believe any of this stuff. When I hear the words Russian disinformation, what I hear now is red scare. Senator, I'm gonna have you, Senator, I'm going to have you chime in here and maybe balance out our two opinions. Obviously, the Russians have been hacking political organizations in the United States and other countries for decades. They did it to the RNC. They did it to Hillary. They do it as a tactic. That is a fact. And also, I don't think anybody thinks like Trump is a man churring candidate. So you tell me where reality is between these Chinese do it too.

33:58There's no question. Yeah, Chinese are big. I'm sure. Of course, but I think what separates this though was that now that we know what we know I mean actually in the documents that were released by released by Tulsi Gavard the director of national intelligence was that Hillary Clinton Was the preferred candidate they had the goods on her they had her medical records all the stuff They so Trump was not like this preferred Poo the Russians had all that hacked information the Russian yeah, they had that and so what was done was Hillary Clinton knew that she had an email problem. And then she works with a George Soros funded NGO, right?

34:32They come up with this plan to say, well, Trump is cozy with Russia. The steel dossier finds this op -o, whatever is fake op -o. Then as David said, they laundered through intelligence agents. Then that became the thing. And I think the problem is, and why people have lost trust in a lot of his institutions, in many cases, rightfully. So it's because they were really weaponized against political opponents and they were weaponized against the American people and there's going to be a lot of accountability by I think before people gain that trust back. So I think - Yeah, that was my next question is how do we get past this because we're sitting here with like one group who feels, hey, there's all these really suspicious Russian connections to Trump and the people around him.

35:11Jason King, you see that this was manufactured. It's many, you have to start with some parts of your real - Some parts of your real - Hamilton 60 and all the stories based on it. Manufactured hoax. How do we get to reality where you got to peel back, you got to peel back all the thickness. Well, I think also you have to accept that the Russians are hackers and don't have our best interest. I don't actually want to come after us politically, David. I'm sure the Russians have cyber operations. I'm sure they do, but they hacked Hillary. He's in, you know, he knows and this has all been confirmed.

35:45The problem here is that that was used as a as a predicate. it. Again, this is why it's so jarring. It was used as a predicate to spy, and Barack Obama authorizes it to spy on a presidential candidate. And then as a predicate then to investigate a president and waiting. And then as a predicate to try to destroy his administration, it was used in a gobbled up so much time in those first two years, that to me is a pretty unique circumstance. And beyond just, yeah, foreign nations are trying to get information. since we're here, there's this lawsuit that is now happening or this investigation, I guess, as an attorney and you were the AG, explain to the American people what the case is right now that they're going after, you know, with this Russia gate allegations.

36:36And then where is it in the courts? Give us the mechanics of it and where do you think it winds up? So the question is was there was anything done illegal during this sort of Russia gate hoax stuff that could be chargeable? I think you've got Ironically Barack Obama has presidential immunity because of the case that President Trump won at the Supreme Court Which by the way my solicitor general at the time of Missouri was John Sauer He's now this listener general in the United States He was also Trump's lawyer who argued that presidential immunity case about a year ago, but so So he probably has immunity from official acts when he was in office, but not when he's out of office.

37:17So the real question will be, you sort of a conspiracy, I think the most likely charge, you can make the case as a conspiracy against a conspiracy to defraud the United States. This is a very elaborate scheme again to undermine people and whether they get indictments or not, I think they should pursue them and we'll see if that happens. Um, but I think the like the most likely targets of that are Komi, Clapper and Brennan, um, for their role. And they're being accused of what exactly of manipulating this, a minute, and manipulating these falsehoods into actionable intelligence, again, against the president of the United States, Donald Trump.

38:00What are they being charged with? I guess is what I'm getting at or Well, you can't be the head of the FBI or the head of the CIA and have information you know is false to then open up a criminal investigation against the president, which is what happened, right? And so that's a kind of a big thing. So again, most people would say probably the statute limitations has run on many of those charges. But again, an ongoing conspiracy is something different. And by the way, the conspiracy doesn't need to involve you from point A to point Z. Once you sort of begin the conspiracy. So like, you know, again, it just go down this rabbit hole a little bit.

38:42Like, what was Jack Smith looking for at Mar -a -Lago when he went down there? Like, he's probably looking for some of the information related to the steel dossier that they thought that he probably took with him. I don't know that for certain, but that's certainly a plausible explanation. So this, and again, you have to remember Jason that President Trump leaves office. He announces he's running for president in the fall of 2022. Three days later, a few things happened then. The assistant district attorney in Atlanta in a state case visits the White House Council's office. The number three person at DOJ leaves the department of justice and goes work for Alvin Bragg who then later brings a case against President Trump.

39:24Jack Smith is appointed as special counsel who's in prosecutor world. You know he's this higher gun He goes out and tries to put President Trump in jail for the rest of his life They try to bankrupt his family. So like it is very obvious to anyone paying attention that this law fair that was aimed against Donald Trump was meant to make sure he never got back in office again And by the way if he never got back in office again all the state stuff that Tulsi Gabbard discovered and laid out there, the cash hotel found in burn bags wouldn't be out in the open. So much like how we expose the corruption of Missouri versus Biden, I think that's kind of what we're at right now.

39:59This is a big jump though, because the FBI rate on Mar -a -Lago was because Trump wouldn't give back these specific documents that they were at the top floor. Right. What were the documents they were looking for? Right. What were the documents they were looking for? And that he was obstructing justice and that they were, you know, and that was thrown Yes, right. You're making the jump from that that they were looking for something related to the steel dossier. And Trump could have just given those documents back. So I always wondered in that one, why he just didn't give the documents back? Why was he so steadfast against?

40:33He can classify anything as president, which was the likely scenario, but they did it anyway. I mean, I think, well, why would he just, I mean, if you were advising him, wouldn't you just sound like, hey, just give the documents back? I think he was in touch with the archivist. And that was an ongoing conversation and then Jack Smith with the federal prosecutor down in Florida moved with guns to seize these documents. Right? I mean, it's very unusual. I was dramatic for sure. I just don't, I mean, I just never understood what he just didn't give the documents back. It would just, I mean, I know Trump does unique things in the world.

41:03But I would have just given the documents back, which is what every other president did when they were asked to give documents back. Sure. But except remember, Joe Biden, who wasn't ever president, he was vice president, who can't be classified document had boxes and boxes of classified documents. If it is garage, we're hungry. I live. So like it was down to you now, Jay, Cal, you started believing that Trump was a Russian ass. I never bought it based. Yeah, you did. No, no, no, I didn't. I always thought that was like a crazy concept. I didn't believe those tweets, but you did. No, no, I always thought you were fooled by the media.

41:39It's okay. I always thought people were fooled. I said this very clearly on the pot. I always believe the Russians wanted to create chaos. Like we're experiencing here in this discussion amongst Americans to distract us and that they would do it even handly with anybody. They would do it with... The people who were creating the chaos were actually the people who perpetrated this coup attempt against the president, the people who perpetrated the Hamlet since 68 dashboard fraud. Those are the people who perpetrated the chaos. Sure. I think if the Russians were really having evidence. You're not really having evidence.

42:09You're not having specific evidence. You don't have specific evidence of a Russian. in a hack. Go read not TBS reporting. I just gave it. This is refuted. I just gave it to the the RNC. The head of the RNC said, yes, we were hacked. Our partners were hacked. They they they explicitly said this. This is all facts, David. But anyway, we got to center here. We we can have our Russian gate to bathe forever. You can tell me that I think Trump's the Russian asset. I don't think red Trump's a Russian asset. I think that's insane. But I do think the Russians like to cause cast moving on. Brennan. I believe it was Brennan and these Tulsi documents that just got released.

42:41Here's what I think is so notable about them. I mean, other people may have their own opinion is that it shows that I think there's a document there where Brennan, Brennan was like the head of the CIA. Correct. He received an intelligence assessment from the organization in which they said, look, there's nothing to this. It's bogus. We have it. It's still dossier, you're saying? Not just the steel DOSCA, but the whole idea of somehow that the Russians had run this elaborate interference operation in the 2016 election, and that somehow Trump was compromised. In other words, the intelligence analysts did their job and came up with the correct conclusion.

43:19And nonetheless, Brennan said that the steel dossier should be included in the official intelligence assessment because it had the, quote, ring of truth to it. Okay. So he was advised by his own analyst that this was nonsense. And yet he pushed to include it in the official intelligence report. And then that became the basis for opening the investigation. You see how this worked? Allegedly, and we'll find out who'll have their day in court. I mean, I'm totally fine with it. This is what's in the documents. Well, I mean, we'll find out if this is a theatrical exercise or if it's actually gonna go to court, what do you think?

44:00I think it'll go to court. I think this is, and by the way, I think it's one of the reasons why they were so obsessed in making sure President Trump never got back into office. One of the reasons. I mean, again, in the book, I talk about how there's this an emergency real or perceived, then you other people and then you try to silence to send, I think it happened with COVID, it happened with this, anybody that claimed that Russia didn't have, of, you know, that, that President Trump was in a Russian asset, was a trader and a Putin lover. I mean, this stuff, it's kind of wild, honestly, but I think we're on the other side of the fever dream, but there does need to be some accountability now.

44:36This is your first term as Senator, I believe? Yes. Yes. I was elected in 2022. I'm curious. One, any great stock tips.

44:47You have to call me down with a rush to get now. We're just trying to get some insider permission to trade on number two. Look, I think one of the reasons why the Russians, we can stop talking about Russia -Gate, but I think one of the reasons why it was so important. First of all, it was effectively a coup against the President of the United States, because these were executive branch officials who owe a duty of loyalty to the elected president. Instead, they were working to subvert an undermine in based on essentially lies and hoaxes and manufacturing material. I mean, that is basically the definition of a coup.

45:21So I think that is a big deal in and of itself. But I think the other reason why it's such a big deal is I do think that it helped create this intense russophobia in the United States that has led us to the point we're at right now, which is we are basically in a war with Russia, or at least we're backing Ukraine in a war with Russia. And actually, you heard this at the Alaska Summit. I think that this whole russicate thing, which we now know is completely bogus, poisons and relations between the United States and Russia for years, because the media kept reporting this bogus idea that somehow Trump was a Russian asset and somehow they had interfered in our elections.

45:59And I think this helped create a very hostile relationship between the United States and Russia. Clearly, Russia gave led to the Putin in the United States. It led to the power of the murder and murdering the United States. Yeah, it led to a souring or the relationship and it doesn't justify his murderous campaign in Ukraine David you would agree I'm not that's not the argument I'm making. I know I'm but I'm forcing you to agree that he hated Ukraine and murdered people and he's a war criminal And you know that those are just facts as well David. I'm sorry I think those are the shades that that basically attempt to strip that Complicated war of all of its context so that we can achieve a peaceful solution to it Obviously, but you got to obviously Putin invaded the country, but the conflict there goes back 10 years.

46:49There's a long history to it. I'm not looking to rehash all of that. The point is, we could have worked out a resolution to this conflict, maybe before it started, if we didn't have hostile relationships with Russia. That's the point I'm trying to make. Senator, I'll give you the choice. I want to talk to you about just a cent in general, and and then I want to talk a little in your experiences there, or we could just go right into what's happening with this Russian peace deal and the status. Yeah, where would you like? I was on a Sunday show yesterday and I consider myself firmly in the camp of being an American realist.

47:24I think that a lot of the people that are really critical of President Trump's efforts right now have been wrong about foreign policy for a very, very long time. Jake Sullivan included, right, who presided over the disastrous withdrawal of the in a Stan who basically on his watch, Russia invaded Ukraine. What is their position, Senator? What do you think their position is? Like why are they so tweaked? Why are they so tweaked that he met with Putin, you think? I don't know because there is no plan. There's never been a plan. The only plan they ever had was is that the United States taxpayer would continue to funnel over $200 billion gone out of plan.

47:56And I had a problem with that in my first couple of years. Vice President Vance viewed the world kind of someone with that in the same way. I think we ought to focus on our core national interest, the homeland, we have to figure out a way to pivot the China. We have to get our NATO allies to step up in a much more meaningful way. I think one of the great irons of all this is that these European countries who are going to be in the White House in the Oval Office today, they talk about Putin being this existential threat. Well, they sure don't act like it. They don't really spend like it. Correct.

48:27And by the way, if they spent what we spent on national defense, that would free up about $300 billion for us to focus actually on the end of Pacific where China now has a bigger Navy than we have, not a better Navy, but a bigger Navy. There is Trump's biggest accomplishment is probably geopolitically getting NATO to spend what they're supposed to spend, yeah? Yeah, I went over to, I was actually at the Munich Security Conference. I went over there. I'm a bit of a contrarian there. I guess I would say the ascending wing of the Republican Party on this kind of realism versus this kind of Wilsonian adventurism that's dominated permanent Washington for a long time, just to tell them the truth, which is not what they wanted to hear, but the truth, which is the things I just said, you need to step up and move them in a meaningful way.

49:12If you think about the Cold War, it was meant to sort of prop them up to defeat Soviet communism. Our trade deals were never renegotiated. We never expected much more from them and all that's happening now. So this is kind of the place that I've been hoping to be. But I think President and Trump's trying to broker a piece here. The problem with the critics is they just don't have an alternative. This is a meat grinder. This is a war of attrition. This is what Russia does. That's what they've done for centuries. So if your solution is that, well, we shouldn't talk to Putin. I don't know how you get to a piece deal.

49:45Diplomacy means you talk to some people that you would never want your daughter to marry, but like you accept the world as it is and try to move forward. And I think that's what he's trying to do. And David, I think the chances of successfully negotiating anything with a dictator who gets to do whatever he wants is like five or 10 % on a good day. Are you talking about Zelensky? I love it. You have it in for the emerging democracy that was invaded. Zelensky is now in his fifth or sixth year of a four year term. Hold on. No, this is this is just me saying. I'm not sure anyone else. I know you're out of your lane.

50:19So Zelensky basically banned opposition political parties. He basically cracks down on the press. You don't get to be a reporter in Ukraine unless you get a license from the government. He cracked down on religion, on the Russian Orthodox Church, priests, nuns, so forth. He's basically seized the assets of his political opponents. And most importantly, he's now in the like fifth year of a four year term. He canceled elections. So I'm not quite sure upon what exactly you're making these highly more realistic condemnations I just think the conflict is much more complicated than you would like it to be.

50:57And you know, this whole idea that Zelensky represents democracy, whereas Putin represents authoritarianism, that's not what's going on. Just statistically, you're wrong. If you were to look at any of the ratings of democracies in the world, Russia would be amongst the lowest scores. And the Ukraine would be in the high middle scores compared to the truly free country. Maybe it was far from the election. It was a few cancel elections, but you have to think twice about that after the election. There is a democracy. There is a democracy in Ukraine right now. There's this not. Well, they're out there.

51:26Yeah. Okay, fine. But we had elections when we were in the Civil War and we were in World War II. We had elections. I don't know that that's a great reason. Senator, which is a more democratic country? Ukraine or Russia? Russia is an authoritarian regime, but I think David makes some, like I'll let's give you one example. So you can't just answer the question. I mean, I'm saying you're a senator. I'm just going to give you a question. Jay, how you're using democracy as a bumper sticker and a buzzword instead of actually thinking about what it really means. And actually, if we're really going to think about what democracy means, then let's ask what the people of Ukraine think.

52:01That's what to me, democracy means you actually listen to the people. Gallup just to the survey of the people of Ukraine. Let's put these numbers on the screen. This is Gallup. And this before the Alaska summit, this was not publicly motivated in any way. And what they found is that Ukrainians have lost their appetite for war, support for the war is collapsed a year ago, support for the war was in the 60s or 70s. Now it's collapsed to 24%. So the vast majority of Ukrainians now want a resolution to the conflict, even if it means making concessions. Yeah, I know. I, I, I, when you can't dispute this, of course, they're, they've got war fatigue like they should.

52:40This is what democracy means to me is that we should actually listen to the desires of the Ukrainian people. Well, Russia has five times the people, three times the, I mean, are three times the people, five times the munitions, they have an industrial base. This, you know, for Ukraine, I think the next step here is there has to be a negotiated piece here. This can't go on forever. Europe is not in a position, I think, to provide what they claim to want to provide. In the United States of America, I mean, part of the problem is, and other people have made this point, that even if you spent, let's just say we wanted to spend another hundred billion dollars.

53:14The industrial base doesn't exist to build all of the stuff that they need right now anyway. Like they have a there's a real problem here and I think President Trump campaigned on the idea of negotiating a piece. I don't know why that's so controversial. And I'm not saying from you I'm saying but the pundits, yeah, it's like he's a pain. The idea that you know Russia has nuclear weapons. The idea that he wouldn't have a one -on -one conversation. Yeah that's why I asked him that question like is there any stillmaning of this position that we shouldn't meet with Putin or President Xi or Kim Jong -un.

53:48We should obviously meet with all of them. It makes sense if we have even a 1 % chance of making forward progress, when should the United States, Senator, say enough is enough, we're out, figure it out for yourselves. You've got the EU right there. You've got Europe. They've got plenty of money. But America's out. If you want to buy some weapons, we sell weapons. That's fine. and I think Trump has done an amazing job of enforcing the loan lease that Biden set these up. So when we keep saying we're spending 100 billion, that's no longer true, right? We're getting all that money back because Trump forced Zelensky to negotiate the table.

54:25We're getting all that money back. But when should we, just a week, have clear facts here that it's not costing the American people, you know, this hundreds of billions of dollars anymore, thanks to President Trump, to have a negotiator. I give him credit. We're credit is due. But when should we in your mind step back and say, you know what, not our problem anymore, you guys figured out, because that seemed Vice President JD Vance, a friend of the pods position as well. At some point we have to say enough, and Trump sort of said that too. He alluded to that. At some point we're out. Are we at that point if this doesn't get resolved this time around, do you think?

55:00I think, yeah, I think that that's what this phase is all about, which is to give a legitimate peace process a chance. But the idea that we're going to be voting on, I mean, I wouldn't support it, more A, taxpayer A to Ukraine, for a war that doesn't seem to look like it's ever going to end and is a blank check. It's just unacceptable as a senator for a state in the United States of America, right? Like, it's just not... Now, President Trump, I think, has opened up avenues to sort of make it clear to both parties that there's pressure that could be ramped up to try to bring this to a head. And I think that's where we're at.

55:38It's not going to all happen today. It's not going to happen tomorrow. But that's really what this diplomacy in this TikTok age that we live in. I think we think it's instant gratification. But diplomacy is difficult when you're dealing with other countries with their own national interests and their own sort of inner dynamics. So possible. We walk away this year from the situation, you think? I don't know. I wouldn't want to put a timetable on. I would not want to get in front of the president who's actually sitting in front of the across the table from these world leaders. But I think that he's been pretty clear.

56:06This is not our war. It's not our war. But I think that up to this point, we've wanted to try to provide a time and space for a solution. And I do think if there's anybody who can do it, it's Trump. There's nobody else on the planet. I mean, Macron could not broker this. I mean, you know, I mean, like, so it's the last best hope. My hope is that you do get to a peace process because you're just going to have billions and more people die in really at this point. What do you think, Zach? You think we should walk away if we can't get this resolved with this latest volume negotiations? Or at some point, should we to the president's day enough?

56:43Because he seems exacerbated based on his public statements about this. He's kind of exacerbated with the two parties it seems. Well, look, you're asking me what the president should do and I'm not on the foreign policy team. Right. I'm not going to venture and wait into that. But I'll just say this. I'll just say this. Listen to what the Ukrainians want. I mean, Zelensky's interests may not be the same as his peoples because as long as there's a war, there's no election. They've canceled democracy over there while the war is going on. And as long as that is true, he stays in power. So he has incentives that may not be true for all of his people.

57:24His people want a negotiated peace. And you think if they give up the Donbass and whatever other regions, you know, are on the table here, do you think Putin stops here? Or do you think we'll see him invade another country? Do you worry about that, Sax? Do you worry that this is enabling his behavior? His worst demons? I don't think the Russians have the intention to invade another country and they don't have the capability. Look at how much trouble they've had. We're now three and a half years into the war. They're definitely winning the war. But they've only conquered this eastern part of Ukraine.

57:55They haven't made it for them. Yeah, they haven't made it to the Neap Earth I don't even think they can conquer all of Ukraine or at least it being extraordinarily difficult and resource Consuming so I just think that this thread of Putin Conquering or attempting to invade all of Europe. This is threat inflation. That's my that's my takeaway from a senator. It's like Putin couldn't even take Ukraine. I mean agree Look, this is this is part of the inconsistency of the argument that I've heard in in the Senate for two and a half years, which is That he's Hitler that he's about ready to march through Europe, and this is a we can't be Neville Chamberlain And this is the moment, but at the same time he can't get to Kiev, right?

58:35Like both things can't be true at the same time And he's got again, I think he just had the right to say He's recruiting North Korean to frighten the frontline. I mean like What it's so humiliating for him. All right, listen and Senator, you're welcome on the pod anytime. Great having you here. Everybody buy the book. It's out right now. I don't know if this interview you were expecting, but no, it's great. We had a, he's, no, I talked to him before he came on and I said, hey, listen, keep it not like a monoculture here, like Tucker and the Senator, I'm like, high five in the whole interview, but it was great.

59:08It was great interview. It's great talking classic. You need to have a little spice here to figure out. I love the debate. Yeah, I love the speech, which is why I wrote the book. the last line of defense how to be the left and forward if you want to hear him was on right now. Yeah, we got all right. I want to check it out. Everybody by the book. I don't know if I was seeing you next time. Bye, my great guys. Thanks. Great job, everybody. It was fun.

59:40I'm doing all of you. I'm a moderate truth be told, but right now the left calls me a MAGA retard and then the right calls me a lib tart. So the only thing they have in common is they both think right right yeah, so I'm Well, nobody agrees then maybe there's something to it. It could be consensus There's a cold open fuss