Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Consequential meeting with Donald Trump and many different European dignitaries,
including volodimirs Zelensky of Ukraine. And here a chance for
us to kind of unpack what exactly happened yesterday. Joining
us on our phone line is from Fox News Radio
in Washington, d C. Ryan Schmels. Ryan, thanks so much
for being on our show today.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
Yes, it's always great to be on.
Speaker 1 (00:20):
How are you I'm good, I'm good so far. Let's
talk about this meeting and kind of the just the
backbone of it. What were the efforts to schedule this meeting.
I know that Trump knew he had secured a meeting
with Putin for the last Friday in Alaska, had a
few days notice. Was this meeting kind of pulled together
as soon as that meeting was scheduled.
Speaker 2 (00:42):
It seemed like that was the case. You know, I
think European leaders there was a hope that Zelenski would
possibly involved in the meeting with Putin. It did not happen,
but you know, Trump had got on the phone with
them and briefed them afterwards, and eventually they decided to
come on over and have that meeting with Trump and
did it in a relatively quick way, like you just mentioned.
(01:03):
So now the next meeting moves on to a meeting
between Trump or sorry, Putin and Zolensky, and then potentially
another meeting after that with Putin, Vilensky and Trump involved,
so a trilateral and hopefully, according to President Trump, that
means that they'll get closer to ending the war. Possibly.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Yeah. He mentioned yesterday in his opening statements when the
media was present, that this was he thought this would
be an easy war to be able to solve, and
it's turned out to be one of the harder things
that he's had to do so far in the presidency.
But there was something different about the vibe there in
the respect that all of these leaders who he's He's
(01:41):
definitely had words with Zolensky. We saw that he's had
not great things to say about Emmanuel macrono France. He
has had some nasty things to say about ursul levonderlyon
in the European Commission. But overall, it felt like there
was a lot of respect in that room yesterday as
they were talking about trying to get this conflict to
a piece conclusion. How would you best describe the feelings
(02:03):
going in and coming out from just the room and
the respect that these leaders had for each other, despite
maybe what they had said about each other previously.
Speaker 2 (02:12):
Yeah, I mean, first of all, I think everyone kind
of breathed a sigh relief seeing Zolensky and Trump and
not have their back and forth there, and and to
be able to have that a very cordial talk. And
you know, Vilensky let Trump do his best hits too,
as he was answering questions that had nothing to do
with the war in Ukraine. You know, he went pull
in on mail and balloting, which was a little off topic,
(02:32):
but that's not exactly uncharacteristic of President Trump to do that,
you know. And and and something that was pointed out
to me that was very interesting was that some believe
that at least those in Zolensky's camp and on Zolensky's
side of this, you know, believe that he really played
it smart by first of all, really thanking the United States,
but also you know, bringing up the letter that Malania
(02:55):
Trump had had written to Vladimir Putin askings and the
war and really focusing on the children who've been taken
prisoner in Ukraine by the Russians. And and and Zelensky
has been pretty adamant about getting them back as part
of a peace negotiation. Uh. You know, that seemed to
really go over well with President Trump and and kind
of calmed him down and mellowed him out quite a lot.
(03:17):
And you also see President Trump kind of uh utilizing
Zelensky did mess with the press by saying that, well,
we're not at war and three and a half years
that means maybe he floated the idea out there of
him running for president again. And you know, he just
knew that the media would blow up over that, and
for the most part did and and but overall, yes,
(03:38):
after the meeting was over, it seemed like everyone had
a good respect for each other and the tensions were low.
But it showed a unified front, which I think was
the most important part of this. According to a lot
of people you talked to associated with it, they wanted
to show a unified front of Vladimir Putin, which could
be the most terrifying thing for him.
Speaker 1 (03:54):
Ryan Schmels, who's report of facts, he's radio joining us
from Washington, d C. So the response after that, I
don't know how anybody Republican or Democrat could look at
the developments over the last four or five days and
say that this is somehow a bad thing. I know
that Donald Trump is not going to receive credit from Democrats,
but knowing that there has been this type of progress
(04:16):
and at least we have all these sites talking about
the same thing, peace at the same time and with
the respect in the room. There wasn't a big blow up.
There wasn't anything you know, viral and the wrong ways
from the meeting yesterday. What has been kind of the
you know, last sixteen hours been like for people in
Washington or people of Congress as they try to kind
(04:39):
of come to terms with exactly these developments are.
Speaker 2 (04:42):
Meaning. Yeah, I think overall on the Republican side, pretty satisfied. Now.
We did get a statement from Greg Meeks, who is
the top Democrat on the Foreign Affairs Committee on the
House side. What he said is, after President Trump gave
President Putin the right carpet treatment on Friday and moved
away from demanding a ceasefire, Russia turned around and launched
(05:04):
yet another attack that killed more innocent Ukrainian civilians just
hours before President Zelenski arrived at the White House to
discuss a path towards peace. For his country. It is
clear that that Ukraine wants peace, but it's obvious that
Putin does not. President Trump must have abandoned the delusion
that Putin is going to engage in good faith to
end this conflict. So, I mean, I think what what
you see on the Democrat side is really just a
(05:27):
caution of not being able to trust Vladimir Putin. I'm
not saying you don't feel on a Republican side either,
but I think this is just a lot more vocal
on the dem side than you hear on the Republican side.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
Yeah, and that's an interesting point because that did happen.
There were videos of it, there were you know, reports
of it.
Speaker 2 (05:46):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (05:46):
But one thing that Donald Trump also mentioned which was
interesting was that he doesn't think a ceasefire is required
to have the negotiations. He felt, like, you know, with
the experience of him helping end what he said was
six wars so far in this administration, helping in those,
that a ceasefire is necessary. We can just stop the
fighting altogether at the peace agreement, but without that ceasefire,
(06:07):
And you were hearing some of the leaders say we
think the ceasefire is necessary, this could still go on.
I mean expecting Putin and or Zelenski to stop the
fighting without a proper ceasefire. In writing it, I mean
that just kind of seems foolish, is it Isn't it?
Speaker 2 (06:24):
Well, I mean what President Trump is kind of saying,
and if you go off the truth social push from yesterday,
he made it seem like the European leaders were in
agreement with you if they should just skip the ceasefire
and go right into peace talks. And I think some
of the logic, at least what I've heard some of
the logic, is that, well, if you spend all this
time negotiating ceasefire, that's just more time that she could
(06:46):
have spent negotiating natural end of the war. So and
I think there is a true lack of trust with Putin,
especially on ceasefires. You know, he's violated so many already.
So I think the idea is that, well, if you
get a full on peace agreement, everything then in paper,
and you've got more information that in all that, then
(07:08):
you know it's going to be easier to hold Putin
at his word on a peace agreement, especially if the
European allies are involved and there is a peacekeeping deal
and a security guarantee. Yeah, as opposed to a cease
fire when you just have to pretty much just rely
on Putin. It's a handshake agreement. That's I think that
think they feel that one is a little more realistic
than the other, at least in terms of being able
(07:29):
to trust Pootin.
Speaker 1 (07:31):
We're speaking with Ryan Schmels, who is with Fox News
Radio from Washington, d C. I guess the natural thing
you just kind of mentioned the security guarantees. That's been
something that Zelensky has talked a lot about over the
last couple of years. If we're going to get to
a peace agreement, one thing that Ukraine needs is security
guarantees for the future so that you know, Russia or
(07:52):
anyone else would be deterred from this ever happening. Again,
what is Trump mentioned that Putin said that he would
like consider that as a concession. Russia has, you know,
said something that is a bit different than that. What
is the status of the security guarantee aspect of this,
which Ukraine says is a necessity if they're going to
(08:14):
have a peace agreement.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Right So, what it looks like right now based off
of what President Trump says and what some of the
European leaders have said, it would be you know, Europe
providing the resources and the money as well as the
you know, manpower to do this, whereas the United States
would provide a lot of the military equipment. And there's
actually a bill going around in the center right now
(08:36):
that would codify a lot of that. And what it
essentially would be was that would be that the European
Union and other countries, Ukraine, you name it, would would
pay the United States money and the United States would
make the military equipment that they would need use and
that would be kind of the peacekeeping guild that tentatively
as it looks like. But what we've heard is that
(08:58):
Moscow does not like the Kremlin has kind of pushed
back on this and said that's a non starter for them.
So getting Vladimir Prutin to a point of yes where
that peacekeeping deal can be okay, I don't know what
that looks like. And that's kind of think where some
people believe this might still be a little bit ways
away in terms of ultimately finding a true peace agreement.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
And lastly, ryan the NATO aspect, right because these are nations,
we have the NATO Secretary General Mark Ruda there yesterday.
You have all these nations that are a part of NATO,
and NATO had an incredible summit and seems like they're
as strong as ever right now in the way that
they're they're working together, including the United States. But I
(09:42):
know NATO is a dirty, dirty word as it relates
to Russia and Ukraine's involvement. But even how different would
that security guarantee or any type of security guarantee be
from Ukraine actually becoming a NATO member? Why is that
such a hang up for the Russians.
Speaker 2 (10:00):
Well, I think the problem with with with that Russia
has with this is that, uh, if you were to
do this, it's pretty much like NATO membership. I think
that's their big issue because you know, you're you're pretty
much giving them a security guarantee. Well, and you're putting
you're putting NATO forces on the front line. So if
(10:21):
Russia attacks uh and and NATO allies get killed, then
that means the World War three in some ways has started.
I think that's where some people have a concern about this.
So you know Russia, Russia certainly believes that. I don't
know if they believe this or not, but kind of
what I've heard is that they kind of view this
as very similar to NATO membership, and Trump is even
(10:42):
compared to that. He's that this is practically the last
thing before NATO membership. It's the closest thing to NATO
membership you can possibly get. So that's I think where
the pushback is coming here.
Speaker 1 (10:55):
We will see what the next steps are going to
be and that's what the timeline will look like for
the meetings between a Zolinsky Putin and eventually Trump with
them as well. Ryan Schells is going to be on
the call for all of that. Ryan really appreciate the
time today, Thanks so much.
Speaker 2 (11:10):
He thanks, buddy, have a go on.
Consequential meeting with Donald Trump and many different European dignitaries,
including volodimirs Zelensky of Ukraine. And here a chance for
us to kind of unpack what exactly happened yesterday. Joining
us on our phone line is from Fox News Radio
in Washington, d C. Ryan Schmels. Ryan, thanks so much
for being on our show today.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
Yes, it's always great to be on.
Speaker 1 (00:20):
How are you I'm good, I'm good so far. Let's
talk about this meeting and kind of the just the
backbone of it. What were the efforts to schedule this meeting.
I know that Trump knew he had secured a meeting
with Putin for the last Friday in Alaska, had a
few days notice. Was this meeting kind of pulled together
as soon as that meeting was scheduled.
Speaker 2 (00:42):
It seemed like that was the case. You know, I
think European leaders there was a hope that Zelenski would
possibly involved in the meeting with Putin. It did not happen,
but you know, Trump had got on the phone with
them and briefed them afterwards, and eventually they decided to
come on over and have that meeting with Trump and
did it in a relatively quick way, like you just mentioned.
(01:03):
So now the next meeting moves on to a meeting
between Trump or sorry, Putin and Zolensky, and then potentially
another meeting after that with Putin, Vilensky and Trump involved,
so a trilateral and hopefully, according to President Trump, that
means that they'll get closer to ending the war. Possibly.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Yeah. He mentioned yesterday in his opening statements when the
media was present, that this was he thought this would
be an easy war to be able to solve, and
it's turned out to be one of the harder things
that he's had to do so far in the presidency.
But there was something different about the vibe there in
the respect that all of these leaders who he's He's
(01:41):
definitely had words with Zolensky. We saw that he's had
not great things to say about Emmanuel macrono France. He
has had some nasty things to say about ursul levonderlyon
in the European Commission. But overall, it felt like there
was a lot of respect in that room yesterday as
they were talking about trying to get this conflict to
a piece conclusion. How would you best describe the feelings
(02:03):
going in and coming out from just the room and
the respect that these leaders had for each other, despite
maybe what they had said about each other previously.
Speaker 2 (02:12):
Yeah, I mean, first of all, I think everyone kind
of breathed a sigh relief seeing Zolensky and Trump and
not have their back and forth there, and and to
be able to have that a very cordial talk. And
you know, Vilensky let Trump do his best hits too,
as he was answering questions that had nothing to do
with the war in Ukraine. You know, he went pull
in on mail and balloting, which was a little off topic,
(02:32):
but that's not exactly uncharacteristic of President Trump to do that,
you know. And and and something that was pointed out
to me that was very interesting was that some believe
that at least those in Zolensky's camp and on Zolensky's
side of this, you know, believe that he really played
it smart by first of all, really thanking the United States,
but also you know, bringing up the letter that Malania
(02:55):
Trump had had written to Vladimir Putin askings and the
war and really focusing on the children who've been taken
prisoner in Ukraine by the Russians. And and and Zelensky
has been pretty adamant about getting them back as part
of a peace negotiation. Uh. You know, that seemed to
really go over well with President Trump and and kind
of calmed him down and mellowed him out quite a lot.
(03:17):
And you also see President Trump kind of uh utilizing
Zelensky did mess with the press by saying that, well,
we're not at war and three and a half years
that means maybe he floated the idea out there of
him running for president again. And you know, he just
knew that the media would blow up over that, and
for the most part did and and but overall, yes,
(03:38):
after the meeting was over, it seemed like everyone had
a good respect for each other and the tensions were low.
But it showed a unified front, which I think was
the most important part of this. According to a lot
of people you talked to associated with it, they wanted
to show a unified front of Vladimir Putin, which could
be the most terrifying thing for him.
Speaker 1 (03:54):
Ryan Schmels, who's report of facts, he's radio joining us
from Washington, d C. So the response after that, I
don't know how anybody Republican or Democrat could look at
the developments over the last four or five days and
say that this is somehow a bad thing. I know
that Donald Trump is not going to receive credit from Democrats,
but knowing that there has been this type of progress
(04:16):
and at least we have all these sites talking about
the same thing, peace at the same time and with
the respect in the room. There wasn't a big blow up.
There wasn't anything you know, viral and the wrong ways
from the meeting yesterday. What has been kind of the
you know, last sixteen hours been like for people in
Washington or people of Congress as they try to kind
(04:39):
of come to terms with exactly these developments are.
Speaker 2 (04:42):
Meaning. Yeah, I think overall on the Republican side, pretty satisfied. Now.
We did get a statement from Greg Meeks, who is
the top Democrat on the Foreign Affairs Committee on the
House side. What he said is, after President Trump gave
President Putin the right carpet treatment on Friday and moved
away from demanding a ceasefire, Russia turned around and launched
(05:04):
yet another attack that killed more innocent Ukrainian civilians just
hours before President Zelenski arrived at the White House to
discuss a path towards peace. For his country. It is
clear that that Ukraine wants peace, but it's obvious that
Putin does not. President Trump must have abandoned the delusion
that Putin is going to engage in good faith to
end this conflict. So, I mean, I think what what
you see on the Democrat side is really just a
(05:27):
caution of not being able to trust Vladimir Putin. I'm
not saying you don't feel on a Republican side either,
but I think this is just a lot more vocal
on the dem side than you hear on the Republican side.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
Yeah, and that's an interesting point because that did happen.
There were videos of it, there were you know, reports
of it.
Speaker 2 (05:46):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (05:46):
But one thing that Donald Trump also mentioned which was
interesting was that he doesn't think a ceasefire is required
to have the negotiations. He felt, like, you know, with
the experience of him helping end what he said was
six wars so far in this administration, helping in those,
that a ceasefire is necessary. We can just stop the
fighting altogether at the peace agreement, but without that ceasefire,
(06:07):
And you were hearing some of the leaders say we
think the ceasefire is necessary, this could still go on.
I mean expecting Putin and or Zelenski to stop the
fighting without a proper ceasefire. In writing it, I mean
that just kind of seems foolish, is it Isn't it?
Speaker 2 (06:24):
Well, I mean what President Trump is kind of saying,
and if you go off the truth social push from yesterday,
he made it seem like the European leaders were in
agreement with you if they should just skip the ceasefire
and go right into peace talks. And I think some
of the logic, at least what I've heard some of
the logic, is that, well, if you spend all this
time negotiating ceasefire, that's just more time that she could
(06:46):
have spent negotiating natural end of the war. So and
I think there is a true lack of trust with Putin,
especially on ceasefires. You know, he's violated so many already.
So I think the idea is that, well, if you
get a full on peace agreement, everything then in paper,
and you've got more information that in all that, then
(07:08):
you know it's going to be easier to hold Putin
at his word on a peace agreement, especially if the
European allies are involved and there is a peacekeeping deal
and a security guarantee. Yeah, as opposed to a cease
fire when you just have to pretty much just rely
on Putin. It's a handshake agreement. That's I think that
think they feel that one is a little more realistic
than the other, at least in terms of being able
(07:29):
to trust Pootin.
Speaker 1 (07:31):
We're speaking with Ryan Schmels, who is with Fox News
Radio from Washington, d C. I guess the natural thing
you just kind of mentioned the security guarantees. That's been
something that Zelensky has talked a lot about over the
last couple of years. If we're going to get to
a peace agreement, one thing that Ukraine needs is security
guarantees for the future so that you know, Russia or
(07:52):
anyone else would be deterred from this ever happening. Again,
what is Trump mentioned that Putin said that he would
like consider that as a concession. Russia has, you know,
said something that is a bit different than that. What
is the status of the security guarantee aspect of this,
which Ukraine says is a necessity if they're going to
(08:14):
have a peace agreement.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Right So, what it looks like right now based off
of what President Trump says and what some of the
European leaders have said, it would be you know, Europe
providing the resources and the money as well as the
you know, manpower to do this, whereas the United States
would provide a lot of the military equipment. And there's
actually a bill going around in the center right now
(08:36):
that would codify a lot of that. And what it
essentially would be was that would be that the European
Union and other countries, Ukraine, you name it, would would
pay the United States money and the United States would
make the military equipment that they would need use and
that would be kind of the peacekeeping guild that tentatively
as it looks like. But what we've heard is that
(08:58):
Moscow does not like the Kremlin has kind of pushed
back on this and said that's a non starter for them.
So getting Vladimir Prutin to a point of yes where
that peacekeeping deal can be okay, I don't know what
that looks like. And that's kind of think where some
people believe this might still be a little bit ways
away in terms of ultimately finding a true peace agreement.
Speaker 1 (09:21):
And lastly, ryan the NATO aspect, right because these are nations,
we have the NATO Secretary General Mark Ruda there yesterday.
You have all these nations that are a part of NATO,
and NATO had an incredible summit and seems like they're
as strong as ever right now in the way that
they're they're working together, including the United States. But I
(09:42):
know NATO is a dirty, dirty word as it relates
to Russia and Ukraine's involvement. But even how different would
that security guarantee or any type of security guarantee be
from Ukraine actually becoming a NATO member? Why is that
such a hang up for the Russians.
Speaker 2 (10:00):
Well, I think the problem with with with that Russia
has with this is that, uh, if you were to
do this, it's pretty much like NATO membership. I think
that's their big issue because you know, you're you're pretty
much giving them a security guarantee. Well, and you're putting
you're putting NATO forces on the front line. So if
(10:21):
Russia attacks uh and and NATO allies get killed, then
that means the World War three in some ways has started.
I think that's where some people have a concern about this.
So you know Russia, Russia certainly believes that. I don't
know if they believe this or not, but kind of
what I've heard is that they kind of view this
as very similar to NATO membership, and Trump is even
(10:42):
compared to that. He's that this is practically the last
thing before NATO membership. It's the closest thing to NATO
membership you can possibly get. So that's I think where
the pushback is coming here.
Speaker 1 (10:55):
We will see what the next steps are going to
be and that's what the timeline will look like for
the meetings between a Zolinsky Putin and eventually Trump with
them as well. Ryan Schells is going to be on
the call for all of that. Ryan really appreciate the
time today, Thanks so much.
Speaker 2 (11:10):
He thanks, buddy, have a go on.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.