August 20, 2025 • 14 mins
Political Science Professor Scott Huffmon joins Bo and Beth to discuss the latest developments surrounding the war in Ukraine as President trump aims to broker a peace deal between Ukraine and Russia. Plus, a look at the Trump administration's attempt to tackle crime in D.C.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is good Morning BET.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Eight thirty seven on WBT on your Wednesday, August twentieth.
Time to head to the WBT hotline and welcome as
we do on Wednesdays, and we so appreciate him coming
on with us talk about all things politics. Political science
professor at Winthrop University, Scott Huffman is with us.
Speaker 1 (00:23):
Good morning, sir, Good morning of y'all.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Are well we are. I'm glad to have you here,
and I think we're going to start at the obvious
place when it comes to world politics. Let's go back
to Friday for starters, and then we'll get to Monday
and where we are right now. But as you watched
Friday afternoon the meeting between President Trump and Vladimir Putin
in Anchorage, what were your takeaways from that from that day.
Speaker 1 (00:48):
Well, you know, the whole thing, the way it was
arranged was kind of different from the norm. But Trump
is a very different from the norm. President. He had
gone into it saying things like, you know, he would
want to demand a ceasefire, he would put serious sanctions
on Russia, and when he came out of it, he
was much more in line with Russia's position of you know,
(01:11):
not demanding a ceasefire, no longer talking about sanctions. So
Russia actually came out of that with a propaganda win.
There's just there's no other way on the world stage
to put that. But that was a propaganda win for Russia. Now,
when the European Union leaders came, things went a lot
(01:31):
more smoothly than they have in the past. You'll remember
President Zelenski from Ukraine being criticized before for the way
he was dressed. He dresses in military uniform because he
doesn't want to see the people who are fighting for
their lives see their leader all dressed up fancy. So
he's never really done that, but he came in a suit.
(01:51):
There was a lot more talk. People knew how to
talk to Trump. They start off with flattery, they go
with the position he wants. The problem is we're not
seeing strict insistence on ceasefire before the bligerents get to
the table. So Russia invaded, they're going to want territory
(02:15):
from Ukraine while battles are going on and people are dying.
Usually that's not the way these things go in the
modern era. So whether or not there's going to be
a ceasefire before there are direct talks between Ukraine and Russia,
with President Trump mediating. Of course, that's yet to be seen.
Speaker 3 (02:38):
Well, you know, I keep pointing out that on Monday,
as Donald Trump is meeting with European Union leaders and
with President Zelenski, Russia launched an attack on Ukraine and
killed civilians, including two children. And to me, I was wondering,
as a political scientist if you thought that that was
just a defiant on the part of Putin, just saying, hey,
(03:02):
I don't like that you're meeting with these people. I'm
going to continue being the aggressor in this scenario. And
if Russia does get some of the land concessions that
he wants, do you as a political science see whispers
of nineteen thirties and forties Germany.
Speaker 1 (03:22):
Well, you know, Trump came away from the Friday meeting thing.
You know, listen, Putin's just tired of the war. And
then immediately Putin launches very active attacks as you mentioned
in Ukraine. So obviously we can never and should never
take anything Putin says not only get face values, we
(03:42):
just shouldn't take it as true. A lot of the
things that Putin wants is a line of control that
would really break the ability of Maine, you know, Central
and Western Europe from protecting from any type of ASI
and it would really weaken that from a standpoint of strategy.
(04:04):
And so he wants that amount of territory. The European Union,
even if they say, okay, we'll give up territory, don't
want it at that line. You know, I don't know.
The CRIMEA is probably never coming back to Ukraine. I
you know, I don't know. The other thing is he
wants security assurances that Ukraine will never join NATO. Well,
(04:26):
you know, if you go back to the fall of
the Soviet Union, Russia said we will always protect Ukraine,
we will never invade Ukraine if Ukraine will just give
up its nuclear weapons because remember us, when the Soviet
Union fell, Ukraine hadn't there were nuclear weapons there. So
that was the promise that was given back then.
Speaker 3 (04:43):
Right, That's one of the history pieces people don't now.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (04:48):
Talking to Scott Huffman from Winthrop University here on WBT,
now you were talking about Trump as the mediator, and
of course now we're waiting to see what this meeting
looks like if it does indeed happen between Zelenski and
Putin and possibly Trump as the third member there of
the Trilat last night, Mark Levin has a radio show.
(05:09):
It was on WBT late last night. He had President
Trump on as a guest. I want to play a
clip from that.
Speaker 4 (05:15):
We're going to try and stop it, and I think
we have a good shot. I had a very successful
meeting with President Putin. I had a very successful meeting
with President Zelenski, and now I thought it would be
better if they met without me, just to see. I
want to see what goes on. You know, they had
a hard relationship, very bad, very bad relationship. And now
(05:37):
we'll see how they do and if necessary, and it
probably would be but if necessary, I'll go and I'll
probably be able to get it closed. I just want
to see what happens at the meeting. So they're in
the process of setting it up and we're going to
see what happens. But you've got to stop the killing.
Markets too much killing. I don't care, you know, you
don't have to be We're not again. Nobody from America
(06:01):
is being killed. We're not being killed. The United States
soldiers aren't involved. We have no boots on the ground.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
So he is, at least initially here saying he's going
to sit back and watch them hopefully meet, and then
get involved if he needs to. My question for you
is A do you think the meeting will actually happen?
And B do you think that Trump will end up
being involved in the long run?
Speaker 1 (06:27):
Well, we're involved one way or the other. I mean,
it's similar to the relationship between Indian and Pakistan. Very
recently and Indian Pakistan came close to yet another war.
Trump actually claimed credit just in the past few days
for having ended that war. He didn't sit down at
the table with anybody, but we were part of the
talks and they worked it out. So we were present
(06:50):
in the room even though there was not a physical presence,
and the same is going to be true here. I
think in the end, I don't know how much can
be accomplished with literally just Zelenski and Putin in a
room while you know, Putin is still hammering away at Ukraine.
You know, again, what the final deal looks like. I
(07:12):
don't know. You know, with Trump had of course campaigned
on I'll end it on day one. I don't you know,
everybody knew that was a bit of hyperbole, but everybody
kind of expected him to work very hard to bring
the belligerents to the table. It looks like they may
come to the table, but the circumstances right now are
very favorable towards putin especially if there's not a ceasefire
(07:35):
in place before they sit down.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
One of the things that I wanted to get your
take on this morning is what's going on in Washington,
d C. And President Trump's decision for the National Guard
to take control of what's going on on the streets there,
and for Trump's attempt to take control of the police
force there in Washington, d C. What do you make
of this move and what do you think the actual
(07:59):
long term goal is, given that there are cities across
the nation that have higher crime rates than d C.
Speaker 1 (08:08):
Right well, the violent crime rate in d C is
at a thirty year all time low. But there was
a high profile crime, you know, attempted crime where a
you know, a nineteen year old kid who'd worked with
Doge was apparently leaving a bar something at three in
the morning. So that high profile crime really got everybody's attention,
(08:28):
even though the crime rate in DC has been dropping,
and you know, the symbolism of the dangerous city has
worked well for Trump, and it worked well for Trump supporters.
So the idea that Trump's going to you know, be
the white Knight, send in the cavalry and clean things up.
That looked really good for the image he's trying to portray.
(08:52):
He can do that easily and quickly in Washington, d C.
Because it's the federal territory. Now, I only ask thirty
days that he can do it before Congress has to
weigh in. But this can set the stage for him
to be able to do it in other cities across
the country. Now. You know, normally it would take the
governor to ask for the National Guard, but we see
(09:14):
that didn't happen in Los Angeles not so long ago.
So again, I think it's sort of testing the waters.
If the National Guard gets police abilities, the ability to arrest,
that would be in violation of the Posse Comitatis Act,
so that would definitely go before the courts. But you
do see them walking around with zip ties on their backpacks,
(09:38):
So the idea is, okay, what are the zip ties for?
It's if they're rushed, are they going to be doing policing?
So it's really kind of both testing the waters to
see what might fly if he does this in other cities,
and a sort of show of force to a supporter saying,
this is what I said I was going to do.
This is what I'm doing.
Speaker 2 (09:58):
You know, it's been a hallmark of his terms so
far to almost just keep the uh. I mean, there
are any number of sort of I mean change change
agents that he's trying to put out there in the
in the in the atmosphere. I mean, I'm gonna read
you this one. Mail in ballots are corrupt. Mail in ballots.
(10:19):
You can never have a real democracy with mail in ballots,
and we as the Republican Party, are going to do
everything possible that we get rid of mail in ballots.
He says. We're going to start with an executive order
that's being written right now by the best lawyers in
the country to end mail in ballots because they are corrupt. Unquote.
That's from the president. And what I mean is, you know,
sort of flooding the marketplace with these these sort of
(10:41):
revolutionary change ideas that may or may not happen, but
he he is, these executive orders are piling up. By now,
what about this idea that he could change the way
we vote.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
Well, you know, again we're not talking about Epstein because
of things like this. But as far as ending mail
in ballots, that is up to the states. The Constitution
gives the states the ability to determine how elections are
played out, so this would take more than a simple
executive order. The interesting thing is, for decades and decades,
(11:14):
the mail in ballots favored conservatives because it was a
lot of older folks, more conservative folks, who were using
the mail in ballots. It wasn't until Trump and the
Republicans started pushing the narrative that mail in ballots weren't
to be trusted. After Trump lost the popular vote in
twenty sixteen, although he won the presidency, that you start
(11:37):
seeing declines in the use of mail in ballots by
people who were favorable to the Republican Party. So you've
seen you know, I looked at the North Carolina numbers
actually two days ago on this, so you see a
decline in the number of registered Republicans who had asked
for mail in ballot. But over decades they had the
older white Republicans in North Carolina had been the ones
(12:01):
asking for mail in ballots. And that's getting less and less,
but mail in ballots have been traditionally very safe. It's
up to the states to determine this. An executive order
can't change it, and it is keeping attention away from
certain areas where maybe Trump doesn't want that attention.
Speaker 3 (12:19):
You know. One of the things he's been criticism criticized
about is the fact that this became more of a
forefront topic of conversation because Vladimir Putin brought it up
on Friday, and then there was a conversation that was
had about how other countries don't have mail in voting,
which is not true because there are multiple countries around
(12:39):
the world that do utilize a mail system for voting.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
Well, you know, there are a lot of countries that
do mail in. There are other countries that do automatic registration.
The millisecond you turn eighteen, you are registered to vote,
and that increases their participation. We don't do that again,
because the Constitute says it's up to the States to
determine how to do that. It would take an amendment.
(13:05):
Other things. For example, in Australia, it's literally illegal to
not vote. You get a fine if you don't vote.
So there are places where turnout looks like it's ninety percent.
Well that's because they get a fine if they don't
turn out. So yeah, there are a lot of things
in other countries that we could be doing, picking and
choosing in ways that you think will help your side.
(13:28):
You know, I think comes across as a little bit
you know, transparent as to what you're trying to do.
But the truth is, in democracies around the world, real democracies,
faux democracies, there are all types of ways, and they
do mail in elsewhere. There are things we don't do
that have proven to participation elsewhere, like automatic registration. So again,
(13:52):
you know, if somebody criticizes something to Trump, like you
know Putin does, that definitely puts it on the forefront
of Trump's radar because he wants to always make the
show of being the strongest on the biggest issues, and
he never wants to show weakness. He's always afraid that
somebody's going to look at him and saying, you know,
you're backing down.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
Doctor Scott Huffman joins us once a week here on
Good Morning Beat Wednesday mornings. Professor of political science at
Winthrop University, also the founder and director of the Center
for public opinion and policy research. We appreciate your time.
Speaker 1 (14:26):
As always, thank you. Have a great day you too,
This is good Morning BET.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Eight thirty seven on WBT on your Wednesday, August twentieth.
Time to head to the WBT hotline and welcome as
we do on Wednesdays, and we so appreciate him coming
on with us talk about all things politics. Political science
professor at Winthrop University, Scott Huffman is with us.
Speaker 1 (00:23):
Good morning, sir, Good morning of y'all.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Are well we are. I'm glad to have you here,
and I think we're going to start at the obvious
place when it comes to world politics. Let's go back
to Friday for starters, and then we'll get to Monday
and where we are right now. But as you watched
Friday afternoon the meeting between President Trump and Vladimir Putin
in Anchorage, what were your takeaways from that from that day.
Speaker 1 (00:48):
Well, you know, the whole thing, the way it was
arranged was kind of different from the norm. But Trump
is a very different from the norm. President. He had
gone into it saying things like, you know, he would
want to demand a ceasefire, he would put serious sanctions
on Russia, and when he came out of it, he
was much more in line with Russia's position of you know,
(01:11):
not demanding a ceasefire, no longer talking about sanctions. So
Russia actually came out of that with a propaganda win.
There's just there's no other way on the world stage
to put that. But that was a propaganda win for Russia. Now,
when the European Union leaders came, things went a lot
(01:31):
more smoothly than they have in the past. You'll remember
President Zelenski from Ukraine being criticized before for the way
he was dressed. He dresses in military uniform because he
doesn't want to see the people who are fighting for
their lives see their leader all dressed up fancy. So
he's never really done that, but he came in a suit.
(01:51):
There was a lot more talk. People knew how to
talk to Trump. They start off with flattery, they go
with the position he wants. The problem is we're not
seeing strict insistence on ceasefire before the bligerents get to
the table. So Russia invaded, they're going to want territory
(02:15):
from Ukraine while battles are going on and people are dying.
Usually that's not the way these things go in the
modern era. So whether or not there's going to be
a ceasefire before there are direct talks between Ukraine and Russia,
with President Trump mediating. Of course, that's yet to be seen.
Speaker 3 (02:38):
Well, you know, I keep pointing out that on Monday,
as Donald Trump is meeting with European Union leaders and
with President Zelenski, Russia launched an attack on Ukraine and
killed civilians, including two children. And to me, I was wondering,
as a political scientist if you thought that that was
just a defiant on the part of Putin, just saying, hey,
(03:02):
I don't like that you're meeting with these people. I'm
going to continue being the aggressor in this scenario. And
if Russia does get some of the land concessions that
he wants, do you as a political science see whispers
of nineteen thirties and forties Germany.
Speaker 1 (03:22):
Well, you know, Trump came away from the Friday meeting thing.
You know, listen, Putin's just tired of the war. And
then immediately Putin launches very active attacks as you mentioned
in Ukraine. So obviously we can never and should never
take anything Putin says not only get face values, we
(03:42):
just shouldn't take it as true. A lot of the
things that Putin wants is a line of control that
would really break the ability of Maine, you know, Central
and Western Europe from protecting from any type of ASI
and it would really weaken that from a standpoint of strategy.
(04:04):
And so he wants that amount of territory. The European Union,
even if they say, okay, we'll give up territory, don't
want it at that line. You know, I don't know.
The CRIMEA is probably never coming back to Ukraine. I
you know, I don't know. The other thing is he
wants security assurances that Ukraine will never join NATO. Well,
(04:26):
you know, if you go back to the fall of
the Soviet Union, Russia said we will always protect Ukraine,
we will never invade Ukraine if Ukraine will just give
up its nuclear weapons because remember us, when the Soviet
Union fell, Ukraine hadn't there were nuclear weapons there. So
that was the promise that was given back then.
Speaker 3 (04:43):
Right, That's one of the history pieces people don't now.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (04:48):
Talking to Scott Huffman from Winthrop University here on WBT,
now you were talking about Trump as the mediator, and
of course now we're waiting to see what this meeting
looks like if it does indeed happen between Zelenski and
Putin and possibly Trump as the third member there of
the Trilat last night, Mark Levin has a radio show.
(05:09):
It was on WBT late last night. He had President
Trump on as a guest. I want to play a
clip from that.
Speaker 4 (05:15):
We're going to try and stop it, and I think
we have a good shot. I had a very successful
meeting with President Putin. I had a very successful meeting
with President Zelenski, and now I thought it would be
better if they met without me, just to see. I
want to see what goes on. You know, they had
a hard relationship, very bad, very bad relationship. And now
(05:37):
we'll see how they do and if necessary, and it
probably would be but if necessary, I'll go and I'll
probably be able to get it closed. I just want
to see what happens at the meeting. So they're in
the process of setting it up and we're going to
see what happens. But you've got to stop the killing.
Markets too much killing. I don't care, you know, you
don't have to be We're not again. Nobody from America
(06:01):
is being killed. We're not being killed. The United States
soldiers aren't involved. We have no boots on the ground.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
So he is, at least initially here saying he's going
to sit back and watch them hopefully meet, and then
get involved if he needs to. My question for you
is A do you think the meeting will actually happen?
And B do you think that Trump will end up
being involved in the long run?
Speaker 1 (06:27):
Well, we're involved one way or the other. I mean,
it's similar to the relationship between Indian and Pakistan. Very
recently and Indian Pakistan came close to yet another war.
Trump actually claimed credit just in the past few days
for having ended that war. He didn't sit down at
the table with anybody, but we were part of the
talks and they worked it out. So we were present
(06:50):
in the room even though there was not a physical presence,
and the same is going to be true here. I
think in the end, I don't know how much can
be accomplished with literally just Zelenski and Putin in a
room while you know, Putin is still hammering away at Ukraine.
You know, again, what the final deal looks like. I
(07:12):
don't know. You know, with Trump had of course campaigned
on I'll end it on day one. I don't you know,
everybody knew that was a bit of hyperbole, but everybody
kind of expected him to work very hard to bring
the belligerents to the table. It looks like they may
come to the table, but the circumstances right now are
very favorable towards putin especially if there's not a ceasefire
(07:35):
in place before they sit down.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
One of the things that I wanted to get your
take on this morning is what's going on in Washington,
d C. And President Trump's decision for the National Guard
to take control of what's going on on the streets there,
and for Trump's attempt to take control of the police
force there in Washington, d C. What do you make
of this move and what do you think the actual
(07:59):
long term goal is, given that there are cities across
the nation that have higher crime rates than d C.
Speaker 1 (08:08):
Right well, the violent crime rate in d C is
at a thirty year all time low. But there was
a high profile crime, you know, attempted crime where a
you know, a nineteen year old kid who'd worked with
Doge was apparently leaving a bar something at three in
the morning. So that high profile crime really got everybody's attention,
(08:28):
even though the crime rate in DC has been dropping,
and you know, the symbolism of the dangerous city has
worked well for Trump, and it worked well for Trump supporters.
So the idea that Trump's going to you know, be
the white Knight, send in the cavalry and clean things up.
That looked really good for the image he's trying to portray.
(08:52):
He can do that easily and quickly in Washington, d C.
Because it's the federal territory. Now, I only ask thirty
days that he can do it before Congress has to
weigh in. But this can set the stage for him
to be able to do it in other cities across
the country. Now. You know, normally it would take the
governor to ask for the National Guard, but we see
(09:14):
that didn't happen in Los Angeles not so long ago.
So again, I think it's sort of testing the waters.
If the National Guard gets police abilities, the ability to arrest,
that would be in violation of the Posse Comitatis Act,
so that would definitely go before the courts. But you
do see them walking around with zip ties on their backpacks,
(09:38):
So the idea is, okay, what are the zip ties for?
It's if they're rushed, are they going to be doing policing?
So it's really kind of both testing the waters to
see what might fly if he does this in other cities,
and a sort of show of force to a supporter saying,
this is what I said I was going to do.
This is what I'm doing.
Speaker 2 (09:58):
You know, it's been a hallmark of his terms so
far to almost just keep the uh. I mean, there
are any number of sort of I mean change change
agents that he's trying to put out there in the
in the in the atmosphere. I mean, I'm gonna read
you this one. Mail in ballots are corrupt. Mail in ballots.
(10:19):
You can never have a real democracy with mail in ballots,
and we as the Republican Party, are going to do
everything possible that we get rid of mail in ballots.
He says. We're going to start with an executive order
that's being written right now by the best lawyers in
the country to end mail in ballots because they are corrupt. Unquote.
That's from the president. And what I mean is, you know,
sort of flooding the marketplace with these these sort of
(10:41):
revolutionary change ideas that may or may not happen, but
he he is, these executive orders are piling up. By now,
what about this idea that he could change the way
we vote.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
Well, you know, again we're not talking about Epstein because
of things like this. But as far as ending mail
in ballots, that is up to the states. The Constitution
gives the states the ability to determine how elections are
played out, so this would take more than a simple
executive order. The interesting thing is, for decades and decades,
(11:14):
the mail in ballots favored conservatives because it was a
lot of older folks, more conservative folks, who were using
the mail in ballots. It wasn't until Trump and the
Republicans started pushing the narrative that mail in ballots weren't
to be trusted. After Trump lost the popular vote in
twenty sixteen, although he won the presidency, that you start
(11:37):
seeing declines in the use of mail in ballots by
people who were favorable to the Republican Party. So you've
seen you know, I looked at the North Carolina numbers
actually two days ago on this, so you see a
decline in the number of registered Republicans who had asked
for mail in ballot. But over decades they had the
older white Republicans in North Carolina had been the ones
(12:01):
asking for mail in ballots. And that's getting less and less,
but mail in ballots have been traditionally very safe. It's
up to the states to determine this. An executive order
can't change it, and it is keeping attention away from
certain areas where maybe Trump doesn't want that attention.
Speaker 3 (12:19):
You know. One of the things he's been criticism criticized
about is the fact that this became more of a
forefront topic of conversation because Vladimir Putin brought it up
on Friday, and then there was a conversation that was
had about how other countries don't have mail in voting,
which is not true because there are multiple countries around
(12:39):
the world that do utilize a mail system for voting.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
Well, you know, there are a lot of countries that
do mail in. There are other countries that do automatic registration.
The millisecond you turn eighteen, you are registered to vote,
and that increases their participation. We don't do that again,
because the Constitute says it's up to the States to
determine how to do that. It would take an amendment.
(13:05):
Other things. For example, in Australia, it's literally illegal to
not vote. You get a fine if you don't vote.
So there are places where turnout looks like it's ninety percent.
Well that's because they get a fine if they don't
turn out. So yeah, there are a lot of things
in other countries that we could be doing, picking and
choosing in ways that you think will help your side.
(13:28):
You know, I think comes across as a little bit
you know, transparent as to what you're trying to do.
But the truth is, in democracies around the world, real democracies,
faux democracies, there are all types of ways, and they
do mail in elsewhere. There are things we don't do
that have proven to participation elsewhere, like automatic registration. So again,
(13:52):
you know, if somebody criticizes something to Trump, like you
know Putin does, that definitely puts it on the forefront
of Trump's radar because he wants to always make the
show of being the strongest on the biggest issues, and
he never wants to show weakness. He's always afraid that
somebody's going to look at him and saying, you know,
you're backing down.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
Doctor Scott Huffman joins us once a week here on
Good Morning Beat Wednesday mornings. Professor of political science at
Winthrop University, also the founder and director of the Center
for public opinion and policy research. We appreciate your time.
Speaker 1 (14:26):
As always, thank you. Have a great day you too,
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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce
Football’s funniest family duo — Jason Kelce of the Philadelphia Eagles and Travis Kelce of the Kansas City Chiefs — team up to provide next-level access to life in the league as it unfolds. The two brothers and Super Bowl champions drop weekly insights about the weekly slate of games and share their INSIDE perspectives on trending NFL news and sports headlines. They also endlessly rag on each other as brothers do, chat the latest in pop culture and welcome some very popular and well-known friends to chat with them. Check out new episodes every Wednesday. Follow New Heights on the Wondery App, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free, and get exclusive content on Wondery+. Join Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And join our new membership for a unique fan experience by going to the New Heights YouTube channel now!