It's Been A VERY Busy Week

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
All right, don't touch that dow or change the channel
because it's Sunday at seven pm and you were listening
to The Hard Truth with John Deeton on ihearts WRKO everybody.
I hope you had a great week this last week.
Remember you can reach me at the show at John
at Hartruthshow dot com. John at Hardtruthshow dot com. I

(00:24):
want to hear your comments. We've had a big, big,
busy week this last week, both locally and local politics
and in national politics. Biggest news would obviously nationally be
President Trump meeting and having a summit in Alaska with

(00:48):
Vladimir Putin, the president of Russia. First time I believe
since the mid nineteen eighties that Russia's president met on
American soil, and so they met in Alaska. It was
a huge event. We'll talk about that later in the show,

(01:13):
but that, certainly I believe was the biggest news. Now,
when we talk about local news, local news is also
national news, and that has to do with the City
of Boston and its mayor Mayor and Michelle Woo. Mayor
Michelle Woo in the City of Boston is now at

(01:36):
odds in an ultimatum showdown with the Trump administration with
Attorney General Pam Bondi. Because this is what happened everybody,
about a week ago, you know, or it could be
two weeks ago. In the middle of August of this year,

(01:56):
twenty twenty five, Attorney General Pam Bondy sent letters to
Boston and thirty one other sanctuary cities across the United States. Now,
in this letter, Pam Bondy demanded that Mayor WU confirm

(02:20):
and she's also demanding this of other you know, mayors
across the land, Chicago, in Washington, not DC, but the
state Washington, like Seattle, places like that. The letter demanded

(02:42):
that Mayor WU confirm what the city's commitment is to
complying with federal immigration law. Now, what Pam Bondi is
doing in this letter, this ultimatum if you will, and
I'll explain to you why it's an ultimatum. Pam Bondy

(03:05):
requires Boston to detail the immediate initiatives that it is
implementing that the city is going to take to cooperate
and not impeded federal immigration law enforcement. Right. Basically, she's

(03:30):
basically saying, you've gotten to August twenty When I say
she'm talking about Pam Bondy. You got to August twenty there,
Mayor Wu to tell me that you're gonna not impede
our federal law enforcement officers are ice agents. And she

(03:51):
said you better respond to me by August twentieth, and
Pambondy threatened, you know, serious consequences, right, And here's the
serious consequences. She said that if you don't comply with
the federal government and what we want, well we may
withhold federal funding. Now we've seen the Trump administration do this, right,

(04:15):
they did it with Harvard, and they are doing it
with other cities in states where they're holding dollars that
normally would be attributed to states or cities and saying
you're not getting this money. Right, you're not entitled to
federal funds if you're not going to cooperate with the

(04:36):
federal government in our policies, our immigration policies. Now, that's
threat number one. Threat number two by paying Bondy to
Mayor Wu, is that listen, if you guys in these
local cities take steps to actually impede our federal immigration

(05:01):
law for law agents, if you impede them, if you
interfere with them, we're going to arrest you. We're going
to prosecute you for basically harboring illegal aliens. Right, there's
a federal statute that in the statute, it tells people
that if you harbor it's like harboring a fugitive. Right,

(05:24):
If you know someone's got a warrant for their arrest
and you're hiding them, you're harboring the fugitive. Same thing
applies in the federal law to illegal aliens illegal immigrants.
If you take affirmative steps to hide them, to conceal them,
to protect them from being detained, arrested, and deported, then

(05:49):
you could be prosecuted under federal law. So Pam Bondi
has put that out there as well. And then the
third thing Pam Bondi said to Mayor Wou was it's
like another thing we're gonna do is we may send
a whole bunch of federal law enforcement agents, will deploy
them to Boston, you know, kind of a threat of

(06:13):
inundating the city with federal agents walking around and listen.
That's basically what the letter said and what the letter threatened.
So Mayor Wu had a response, and you know, Mayor

(06:33):
Wu is running for re election this year. She's running
against Josh Kraft, who is obviously son of Robert Craft,
the owner of the Patriots. Mayor Wu is winning in
the polls. Most people believe that she's going to coast

(06:55):
to reelection. And remember everybody listening to this, that the
city Board right basically thirteen to zero reaffirmed Boston's sanctuary
status that they want to keep Boston as a sanctuary city. Okay.

(07:19):
So Mayor Wu took advantage of this situation, in my opinion,
and she held a press conference, and certain politicians went
to that press conference. You could see Ed Marky out there.
You know, he's running for reelection, as everybody knows, and
you know he's not gonna it's one of the few

(07:40):
times he's in Massachusetts, Okay, one of the few times
is because cameras are gonna be there and he wants
to get his face on the TV as well because
he's running for reelection. So you know, from this point
to November twenty twenty six, I am imagine Ed Marky

(08:01):
will be in Massachusetts a lot more than he has
been for the last five years. So we see him
at the press conference along with other local politicians, and
Mayor will publicly reject Pambondies' demands, and she says that

(08:22):
unlike the Trump administration, Boston follows the laws. She defended
the city's immigration policy under the Trust Act, and with
the Trust Act is it just basically says that it
limits local law enforcement officers, so city cops, right, Boston

(08:43):
city cops, It limits them their cooperation with federal ICE
officers unless it's a criminal matter. If it's a civil matter,
meaning that the only reason is their status, right, their
status they're illegal, that that's not enough, like they're allowed

(09:07):
to cooperate allegedly even though they're not if you're dealing
with a rapist or a murderer or something like that.
Now we know that the wu administration and the Healy
administration here in Massachusetts has not cooperated with ICE in

(09:30):
those criminal matters because we know that they have not
detained people because of ICE. When ICE requested a detainer
on someone who is a child rapist, they've actually not
prosecuted that child rapist or held them. They've actually relocated

(09:51):
that child rapist to a different hotel after he raped
a child. We had John Featherstone, who was a former
manager of one of these hotels and he explained all that. So,
but under the law, the Trust Act, local police officers
can cooperate with ICE if it's a criminal matter, but

(10:13):
if it's just their illegal or legal status here, then
they're prevented from cooperating. Okay, and Wu basically justified that
position on that policy and said that it's it's the
way it should be. Now. Wu criticized Bondy's threats as unconstitutional.

(10:39):
She said it's coercive. And she reaffirmed that Boston will
remain a beacon of freedom, and she said a beacon
of freedom and safe for all. Now, I paused when
she said safe for all, because if you go to
mass and Cash, you'll see people dealing drugs, using drugs.

(11:03):
You'll see these fentn zombies who are just standing there. Look,
they look like they're like almost performing because they're like
half asleep, half awake, you know, leaning over, but they're
like frozen like a statute because they're so drugged out
of their mind. There's people that are getting robbed in

(11:24):
Boston Commons. There's children that are potentially stepping on needles
and things like that. So, you know, when she caused
it the safest city in America. There's a lot of
local residents who would take issue with that characterization and
would say that Mayor Wu is lying or certainly exaggerating.

(11:47):
So listen, I knew this was going to take longer
than one segment because this is a big deal. You
are listening to the Hard Truth with John Deaton. We
will continue talking about Mayor Wo and Pam Bondi when
we come back back to the show. Everybody, I'm John
Deaton and you're listening to the Hard Truth on w
r KOH. We have been talking about the show down

(12:09):
in Beantown, Mayor Wu versus Pam Bondi. So Bondi gives
this ultimatum, sends this letter, says you got to do
these things or you could face prosecution, You could face
being arrested, and Mayor Wu's response is fu yeah, I

(12:29):
mean that's really what Mayor Wu said. And people nationally
are talking about it, people locally are talking about it.
You got people in the local media here in Boston saying,
you know, arrest Mayor Wu, prosecute her. She is actually
protecting these illegals. She's not cooperating with Ice, She's taking

(12:55):
steps to impede the deportation of people who are here illegally,
including criminals, and we want to arrest it. You got
a lot of people, certainly that are Republican leaning and
some independence that that feel that way, and of course
people on the left think that that's crazy, and it

(13:17):
is making national news. Now I'm gonna play a clip
a first of Steve Miller, who is obviously at the
White House. He is a big part of Trump's immigration policy.

(13:38):
Some would call him the architect of Trump's immigration policy.
So let me play what he did said on on
Sean Hannity on Fox Check this out.

Speaker 2 (13:52):
Let me just break down for your audience, Seawn, how
severe the crime committed by the centctuary cities. So you'll
have a situation where local police in Boston will arrest
an I legal alien who's a child predator, and ICE
will then send what's called a detainer request or a
whole request, and we'll say, don't release this person, hand

(14:14):
them over to ICE, and we'll remove this child predator
from our community. Instead, these sanctuary mayors will order the
police department to ignore the federal request to set them free,
out of the jail, out of the prison, and they
will go back into the community, and then they will
re offend. They will hurt another little girl, they will

(14:36):
hurt another little boy, and then Ice has to spend
weeks trying to scour in the community to find this
public safety threat. What they're doing, Sean is evil, and
President Trump will see that they are held to account
for their crimes.

Speaker 1 (14:51):
Okay, So Steven Miller not holding back, and obviously he's
ref and seeing Boston and saying that Trump is going
to hold people responsible. Now, a big person in the
conservative movement is Charlie Kirk. He has come out and

(15:17):
encouraged recommended that President Trump arrest and prosecute Mayor Wu.
So let's tune in here and listen to Charlie Kirk
and what he's recommending. We're gonna play this clip. It's
going to be a few minutes, so bear with me.

(15:39):
But I think it's worth the discussion.

Speaker 3 (15:42):
Check it out on past time for us to impanel
a grand jury and make a test case out of
Boston Mayor Michelle Wu. She can run her mouth and
run her mouth, but we will not put up with
a neo Confederate fractionalization of this nation. This is Michelle
Wu open saying that she's going to defy Donald Trump
in the city of Boston. It's long past time to

(16:05):
unpanel a grand jury and to arrest her play cut
four h three.

Speaker 4 (16:10):
Silence in the face of oppression is not an option.
The US Attorney General asked for a response by today.
So here it is, stop attacking our cities to hide
your administration's failures. Unlike the Trump administration, Boston follows the

(16:33):
law and Boston will not back down from who we
are and what we stand for.

Speaker 3 (16:40):
They are collaborating in a foreign invasion and looting of
the United States of America. You are the lawless one.

Speaker 1 (16:48):
Now.

Speaker 3 (16:48):
This clip is the key. This is Stephen Miller last
night on Hannity, who went into great detail. I think
that's time for this Department of Justice to make a
test case out of Miss Wu. It is technically they
have this like legal loophole, like, oh, we can decide
not to collaborate as long as we're not contradicting. She
is admitting to harboring illegal aliens. Many people like Harbingers

(17:11):
saying the illegal U turn guy, how many of those
people right now are in your communities? Every single one
of them needs to be deported back to their country
of origin. Play cut four oh seven.

Speaker 2 (17:25):
So you'll have a situation where local police in Boston
will arrest an illegal alien who's a child predator, and
ICE will then send what was called a detainer request
or a whole request, and we'll say, don't release this person,
hand them over to ICE and will remove the child
predator from our community. Instead, these sanctuary mayors will order

(17:47):
the police department to ignore the federal request to set
them free, out of the jail, out of the prison,
and they will go back into the community and then
they will re offend. They will hurt another little girl,
they will hurt another little boy, and then ICE has
to spend weeks trying to scour in the community.

Speaker 1 (18:08):
Listen to that.

Speaker 3 (18:08):
So you have a pedophile in Boston who is arrested.
I says, hey, we're going to remove him for you
in Boston says no, We're on their team, not your team.
This is happening thousands and thousands and thousands of times
a day. This is also why cities will get raids.
We do have federal supremacy in this country. This is
the new Confederacy. We are on the verge of a

(18:30):
nullification crisis. We are on the verge of the new nullifiers.
This is an act of open rebellion against the United
States federal government.

Speaker 1 (18:41):
Okay, So Charlie Kirk played the same clip that I played,
but it was worth hearing again. And the reason is
because Boston is being talked an awful lot about across
the land. It is becoming ground zero, just like open

(19:02):
borders would when I ran against Elizabeth Wore and I said, listen,
everybody out there in the world thinks that Massachusetts is
not a border state. It's actually ground zero in the
southern border crisis, the immigration crisis because of our right
to shelter law comes here, and then the governor who's

(19:23):
allowing the sanctuary state basically says, I'm going to put
them up in a hotel and I'm gonna pay for him,
and I'm going to do their dry cleaning, and i'm
gonna do their ubers. I'm gonna give him free healthcare,
and I'm gonna give them everything. And it's going to
cost US four billion dollars in four years. And so
we've been ground zero, and we're ground zero now in

(19:44):
this fight. But the question for you out there in
the audience listening do you think that the Trump administration
should actually arrest Michelle Wou like Charlie Kirk recommends, he

(20:05):
calls it a test case and pursue a prosecution of her.
Make her the example. Now, what do you think? So
I want you to email me at John at Hartruthshow
dot com, John at Hardtruthshow dot com. Tell me what
you think. Do you think that Mayor Wu should be

(20:28):
arrested and prosecuted? Because you're getting more and more calls
across the country and locally for that to happen. And
so listen, now, let me put on my federal prosecutor
had as many of you know, I was a former
federal prosecutor. So let's first talk about what would happen
if you're Michelle Wou and her team. Do you think

(20:50):
that she wants to be arrested? Well, I'm going to
tell you what I think. I think that Michelle Wou
and her political team are sitting right now. They're hoping
and they're praying that President Trump gives Pam Bondy the

(21:10):
authorization to arrest and begin prosecuting Mayor Wu. Listen, Mayor
Wu is in the middle of a reelection. If she
were to actually be arrested. That would be worth a
billion dollars in advertising. Not only that, but Michelle Wu

(21:32):
would become a hero, a martyr of the for the left.
She's fighting President Trump and she's not giving in any grounds.
And look a sittying mayor of one of the major
cities in this country, in Boston, Massachusetts, where the fight

(21:54):
for freedom first began, the first shots of the Revolutionary War,
the cradle of liberty. She's being prosecuted, and so yeah,
I think they're sitting there saying, please arrest me, Please
arrest me. I think she's going to win her election
by significant if they arrest her the way Boston is,
the way the voting is, how they thirteen to zero

(22:18):
to reaffirm its sanctuary status. I think win. She might
win by seventy percent because of all the publicity she
will get and how she be held up as a
hero to the left and to Democrats. So I think
she wants it, right. I think she's daring, paying Bondy

(22:39):
to do it. But is there a basis right now?
I got to be a lawyer because I know some
of you out there saying, well, of course she's not
cooperating with the federal government. Then of course she can
be arrested. Well, of course anybody can be arrested. Hell
I was arrested, wrote about it in my book. It
got dismissed. It was for but I got arrested. Anybody

(23:03):
can be arrested. The question is under the law, can
she be successfully prosecuted? All right, And when we come
back from the break, we're going to go over that.
But this is what you should know for right now.
In order to prosecutor this is what you have to
prove under the federal law that she had knowledge or

(23:26):
reckless disregard that a person is an undocumented person number one,
number two, that mayor will took affirmative action to substantially
facilitate their illegal presence here in America, or she shielded
them from detection, and that she had the specific intent

(23:49):
to violate the law. That is what must be proven.
We're going to go through it when we come back
from the break. You're listening to the Hard Truth with
John Deeton. Welcome back to the show. Remember you could
reach me at John at Haartruthshow dot com. John at
Haartruthshow dot com. So I gave you the elements right
specific attempt to violate the law, affirmative action to actually

(24:14):
shield them from detection or arrest, and that you have
a reckless disregard that the person is in fact a
undocumented individual. Now can the government prove all three of those?
Now here's an easy example forever everyone. I want you
to imagine. This is an easy way to prove someone

(24:38):
is harboring an illegal alien that violates our immigration laws.
Let's say that you know that your neighbor has an
illegal undocumented migrant living in the house, and ICE agents

(25:01):
show up, and those ICE agents knock on the door
to your neighbor, and you see the illegal migrant coming
out of the back door, and you then say to
that migrant, get in my car with me and I'll
drive you away. And that migrant, illegal migrant, gets in

(25:23):
your car and you drive that person to your Cape
Cod house, and then you hold that person in your
Cape Cod house while the ICE agents are trying to
find that person, and then you hide that person, feed
that person for several months. It doesn't matter, it could

(25:46):
be several hours. You're still guilty. I think you get it.
That is a classic example of someone who could be
found guilty of violating the law, okay, but you got
to understand harboring someone is not broadly defined. You know,
the courts require more than non cooperation. Passive non cooperation.

(26:13):
Not helping the federal agents is not the same as
affirmatively taking steps. Right, So if you don't help the
federal agents, that's not the same as you getting a
guy in your car and driving him away to escape
from ice, Okay, And so sanctuary policies are sort of

(26:37):
passive in nature under the law. They basically say to
the cops and the mayor and all them that you're
just not allowed to help, right, not allowed to help,
But that doesn't mean you take steps to hide. Those
are the differences. So not assisting federal agents such as

(27:00):
declining ICE detainers that Stephen Miller were talking about, or
not collecting immigration data, those are two examples of that
is not cooperating, but it doesn't meet affirmative action that's
usually required under the law. So this for those of

(27:22):
you out there who are upset that they're not helping
ICE and want to arrest it, well, you're not going
to win that case. I'm sorry. It's just the law.
It's the way it is under our laws. A lack
of cooperation does not equate to concealing or shielding someone
from detection, which is what's required. The second thing you

(27:44):
got to understand is that there's a thing called the
Tenth Amendment which gives reserves rights to the states, and
many Republicans out there, you know, would cite the tenth Amendment.
A lot of Republicans cite the tenth Amendment for me
any things, whether it's related to you know, gun issues, abortion, whatever. Now,

(28:08):
Charlie Kirk in that clip said, it's a test case.
President Trump, you need to arrest mayor Wu because it's
a test case and take it up. What that means
is it means take it to the Supreme Court, because
the Supreme Court would need to say that federal immigration

(28:32):
law preempts state or local law sanctuary policies. Okay, Now,
the tenth Amendment doctrine that I was referring to, it's
actually been pretty well settled, and that means that the
federal government can't force a state or local government to

(28:52):
carry out federal regulatory programs. Right, So, if you're a
federal ice agent, you can't force a local sheriff or
a local Boston police officer to arrest the or detain
the illegal immigrant. Right So imagine an ICE agent is

(29:15):
out there and there's two illegals, and he gets one
of them, and there's this Boston City police officer standing
next to him now, and he says, you need to
hold this illegal while I run and go catch that

(29:36):
other illegal. Right now, that local police officer, under Mayor
Woo's policies, right under Governor Healey's policies, can't cooperate. You know. Now,
if I was a cop, I'd have a hard time
not cooperating when I'm talking about a fellow law enforcement officer.

(29:57):
Maybe it fed and I'm a state or something like that,
but I'd have a hard time not assisting in enforcing
the laws of the United States. But maybe I'd get fired,
who knows. But the point is, under our tenth Amendment doctrine,
a federal agent can't force that state cop or that

(30:21):
city cop to help facilitate the arrest, detention, deportation of
these illegals. I know it doesn't make a lot of
sense to people out there. I know that it's some
way you're going to get mad. Don't get mad at me.
I'm just telling you the way it is in the law,
and I'm telling you what the Supreme Court has said
in the past. So this is what would happen. Let's

(30:45):
play it out. Mayor Wu gets arrested, it goes to
federal district court. Federal district judge. Mayor Woo's going to say, listen,
we have a right to shelter law in Massachusetts. So
when I it in an illegal in a hotel, I'm
not concealing them. I'm just complying with the law. I'm

(31:06):
not trying to break federal law. I'm complying with state law.
That would be an argument that she could make. So
the bottom line is the federal district court judge is
going to rule in Mayor Wu's favor, no doubt my mind.
And then the government United States government, paying Bondy as

(31:29):
Attorney General, would have to appeal it to the First Circuit.
And I'm here to tell you someone who's practiced in
the First Circuit, who's practiced in the district court in Massachusetts,
Federal District Court, First Circuit is going to rule in
Michelle Woo's favor as well and basically apply that Tenth

(31:53):
Amendment doctrine and basically say that the Feds can't force
these local officers and officials to cooperate with federal immigration
law or federal immigration agents. So then it goes to
the Supreme Court. Now, the question here is, would five

(32:17):
out of the nine justices agree with the Trump administration
this test case that Charlie Kirk's talking about. Would they say, yes,
we are now going to say that federal immigration law
preempts all state sanctuary policies, and if you comply with

(32:42):
sanctuary policies, that is an affirmative contradiction of federal law
and you can be prosecuted successfully. Can the Trump administration
get five of those justices to do it? We know
they're not going to get the three liberal ones. We
know that, so we know we have three votes that's

(33:05):
gonna find that you can't do what Charlie Kirk wants
to do lawfully. Now the question is what will Neil
Gorsich say? What will Comy Barrett say, Amy Comy Barrett,
will Kavanaugh say allego? I'm pretty sure I know what
you know, Clarence Thomas and others would say. But the

(33:29):
bottom line is, if you made me make a prediction,
I would say that Amy Comy Barrett and Neil Gorsich
would likely rule with the three liberal justices on this
issue and say that the States rights can't be forced

(33:51):
the way that the Trump administration would want them to do.
So that's what I think. I don't think that you
should arrest Mayor Wu. I think that it didn't work
for the for the Democrats did it, you know, and
I think everybody needs to take a pause. They prosecuted

(34:16):
President Trump. He was in court after court, new York Court,
civil court, he was going to face Atlantic Court, Special
prosecutor court. I mean, he was in court everywhere. And
the American people, a majority of the American people voted
for President Trump despite the fact that the Democrats were

(34:38):
out there calling them a felon, calling them, you know,
someone a rapist, all the things that they did. It backfired.
The American people don't like law fare. They don't like
when you take it that extreme and you start prosecuting
your political enemies.

Speaker 2 (34:57):
You know.

Speaker 1 (34:57):
It's a lot like when some people said, old President
Trump needs to deport Zohan Mndami in New York, the
guy that's gonna become the next mayor of New York City.
He's a Marxist, a communist, a socialist, and we need
to get rid of him. And I'm out there saying,

(35:18):
are you crazy? You win by presenting better ideas, you
don't win by prosecuting and hauling into court your political opponents.
So I think it's a dumb idea. I know some
of you out there are going to disagree with me.

(35:39):
Write me at John at Haardtruthshow dot com. Tell me
how wrong I am. Maybe I'll bring you on the
show and you can school me. Even if we disagree,
we should talk about these things because we got serious problems.
You listen to the hard truth. I'm John Deet. When
we get back, we'll talk about that Trump something. Welcome

(36:00):
back to the show. You're listening to the hard truth.
I'm John Daton. Listen everybody. You can follow me at
Johnny Daton number one, John E. Deaton and the number
one on x. You can read Food Stamp Warrior, my
book on Amazon. You can order it if you want
to know everything there is to know about me, the good,

(36:22):
the bad, the beautiful and the ugly. I hold nothing back.
I can assure you that if you read Food Stamp Warrior,
it is like no other book out there. It is raw,
I lay everything out. You'll be surprised when you read
it that I ran for public office actually ended up

(36:43):
being a positive because Elizabeth Warren couldn't find anything against
me that I don't admit to. In that book, you know,
I talk about many things. I talk about the mistakes
I've made in life. I talk about the lessons I've
learned life. I talk about my scars that I have.
I talk about issues that I have. I talk about

(37:05):
being raped as a child and what that caused me,
how it caused me to act out later in life
because I didn't deal with that trauma. So I'd like
you to read the book because I'd like to hear
what you have to say after you read it. It
is a book that is about overcoming adversity, but really

(37:32):
overcoming the greatest obstacle that you're ever going to face
in this world, and that's yourself, because our biggest obstacle
in life is ourselves. And I talk about how I
almost didn't make it, but thank God, I dealt with

(37:53):
issues that I did in all those years, and I've
been given a second chance, and I'm going to try
to do everything I can with it. Actually even thinking
about running again. Because I gotta tell you, I sat
there and I watched ed Marky out there with Michelle
Wou and I see all these things that he's saying.

(38:14):
He is such a hypocrite. He's never faced a real
opponent before. In my opinion, everything this guy stands for,
it's fake. You know, he preaches the Green New Deal,
but he hasn't lowered his own carbon footprint. I think

(38:34):
he's got solar panels on his house. Nope, Think he
drives an electric vehicle, Nope. Guys, just the epitome of
term limits needed for fifty years. That man has been
in Washington, d C. Living in the bubble. And leave
it to a career politician who has spent fifty years

(38:57):
that's five oh, to say I need another chance, Give
me a chance. It's ridiculous. So anyways, I digress. Right,
let's talk about this. I got ten minutes left. I
need to talk to you about the other big news
of the week, and that is President Trump's summit with

(39:18):
Vladimir Putin. And after he had his summit with Vladimir Putin,
he had a summit with Zelenski. And this is a
big deal because you remember when Trump ran he said
he was gonna that the war would not have happened,
that Russia would have never invaded Ukraine if he was president.
And Putin actually said that at the summit. He was

(39:41):
asked by a reporter and he said, yes, it's true.
If President Trump had been the president, not Biden, then
he believes that he would have never invaded Ukraine. And
so listen, they meet in Alaska, and I can tell
you what's on Trump's mind. I think he just wants

(40:03):
to end this war. He wants peace. I think that
even if you're a Trump hater, you should be able
to see that the man sincerely does hate war. When
he talks about children dying, when he talks about all
the needless deaths, I don't think he's faking. I think
he's sincerely. Now listen, leave it to Trump to never

(40:27):
let an opportunity to be a showman expire. Though, because
as him and Putin were walking down the red carpet outside,
Trump had bombers and fighter jets, stealth jets flying overhead
sour as a showing Putin, Yeah, that's America, baby. We
are the greatest military in the world, and you're in

(40:49):
Alaska on our soil. So let me remind you just
who we are. A lot of people criticized it, but
I think it was pure womanship and it was Trump
being Trump. And listen, I think Trump has a selfish motive,
and that is I think that he longs for a

(41:09):
Nobel Peace Prize. He's made a lot of peace agreements,
whether it's with Iran and Israel, whether it's with Armenia,
whether it's with the Congo, And if he could negotiate
a deal, I think he would legitimately be up for

(41:31):
a Nobel Peace Prize. And I think that that's one
of his dreams in the world to get it. So
we know what Trump wanted Zelenski. It's all about survival, folks.
Some of you may not know this, but Russia owns it,
not owns, but controls about twenty percent of all Ukraine territory.

(41:52):
And Zelensky shows up this time. He's in a suit,
so you know it's serious, right, he put a suit
on it. He didn't have a tie, but he looked
good and he had a black suit on. But listen,
he's here for survival. Ukraine is losing the advantage on
the battlefield, so he needs money, he needs weapons, to

(42:13):
keep fighting, and European leaders are all involved because they
want stability in Europe and they have some serious fears. Now,
what was interesting about this meeting is that before the meeting,
Trump insisted that we need to have a cease fire. Listen,
whenever you negotiate peace, the first thing you got to

(42:35):
do is stop killing each other. The first thing you
do is you put the guns down and stop firing
at each other, and you agree to cease fire. But
after the meeting, Putin made it clear that he doesn't
want to cease fire. Zelenski wants to cease fire because
Ukraine's losing the advantage on the battlefield. All experts right

(42:57):
now are pretty much in agreement of that. Putin's in
control of twenty percent of the Ukrainian land, So I
think it's fair to say that Zelenski wants to cease
fire more than Putin, and Putin's playing hardball. And after
that meeting with Putin, Trump put out on social media
he said to Zelenski in the world, look, Ukraine's not

(43:20):
going to become a member of NATAL. That's a that's
a line in the sand for Putin. It's not going
to happen. And he said that Ukraine is going to
have to give up some concessions of land that you
you know, Russia's in control of twenty percent of the land,
So Russia's going to get something now Crimea. Everybody's got

(43:45):
to remember that Russia annex Crimea, took it over in
twenty fourteen under Barack Obama, and Barack Obama didn't do anything,
just let it happen. And so Lynsky is acting as
though Russia has to give Crimea back, and that's just

(44:06):
not going to happen. The best deal that Zelenski can
hope for is that he gets the security guarantees that
America in Europe will protect Ukraine if Russia or anyone
else ever attacks it again. But Zelensky's going to have
to accept that Crimea is Russia's now. Whether that's right

(44:31):
or wrong, it's just the way it is if you're
going to get peace. And the question is how much
of that twenty percent land that Putin's and control is
he willing to give back to Ukraine. So there's a
lot at state. Trump's in his element because he's trying
to negotiate a deal. Zelensky claims he's not going to
give up Land and that he can't even wants Crimea.

(44:53):
But Russia says that they're okay with certain security guaran
and tease as long as NATO's off the table. And
so you know we're going to find out. Trump said
that they're close to a deal but still far away.
Leave it to Trump to tell you both things. Trump

(45:14):
after the meeting told Selenski that he have to make
a deal. He even said that, look, Rushia is a
big power, Ukraine's not. The reality is, after that meeting,
the European leaders come and everyone made a big deal
about the European leaders coming there. Listen, Trump's goal is

(45:37):
to negotiate peace and then make sure that America doesn't
have to pay for everything that the European leaders and
the European countries are paying for it. But you can
bet that Trump wants in on rebuilding Ukraine because that's
going to go to American businesses like van Guard and

(46:00):
black Rock and military contractors. So that's where we stand.
The next step, obviously, is to get a trilateral agreement
a meeting. That's where it's gonna be Zelenski and putin
in a room with Trump acting as a moderator. Mediator,

(46:25):
a negotiated deal. Do I think a deal is going
to happen? Listen, I think this is what's gonna happen.
We got to remember, over a million people have been
killed or wounded in the Ukraine Russian War. It's the
deadliest war in Europe in eighty years. Again, Russia controls

(46:47):
twenty percent of Ukraine. They control three fourths of the
most valuable region, which is the region that has the
rare metals. Obviously, Putin's got his eye on that, but
so does Trump. So I think this is what's going
to happen. Trump's gonna put a deal together where Ukraine

(47:10):
has to give up Crimea and some other piece of land,
and then he'll get the guarantees from America. Trump will say,
America comes in, we participate in their rare minerals, we
get those rare earths, we rebuild, help rebuild Ukraine, we

(47:30):
make European leaders pay for it, and America will protect
you in the future. And if Zelensky doesn't take that deal,
then I think Trump is going to turn on Zelensky.
Now the flip side. If Trump believes a deal is
the best interest of everybody and fair to Putin, and

(47:54):
Putin doesn't. I think you're going to see Trump get
aggressive on Putin and implement sanctions. See next week.