March 3, 2025 • 36 mins
1. Ukraine-Russia Conflict:
- The discussion includes analysis of the ongoing war between Ukraine and Russia.
- The hosts criticize Zelensky's handling of the situation and his interactions with international leaders.
2. European Leaders' Response:
- The podcast covers the response of European leaders to the Ukraine crisis, including a proposed peace plan and financial support.
3. State of the Union Address:
- The episode previews the upcoming State of the Union address by President Trump.
- The hosts speculate on the themes and topics Trump will cover, including immigration, border security, and the administration's achievements.
4. Legislation on Non-Consensual Intimate Images:
- Ted Cruz talks about his legislation aimed at combating non-consensual intimate images and deepfakes.
- The bill seeks to make it a crime to post such images and requires social media platforms to remove them when notified by victims.
Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and the Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts
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 (00:01):
Well, happy Monday. Welcome.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
It is Verdict with Center, Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you.
And if you missed our podcast that we did over
the weekend on the Zolensky disaster in the Oval Office,
I'm going to tell you right now. We put out
that emergency pod. Go back, listen to it, grab it.
That's why if you have any of that subscribe auto
down with button, make sure you do that so you
never miss when those big moments happen and we get
(00:25):
together and do a show real quick, Senator, We've got
a lot happening right now, including a joint session of Congress.
It's going to happen on Tuesday. But Zolensky left the
White House and he hauled it to Europe begging for money.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Well, the fallout continues from the epic meeting last week
between Presidents Zelensky and Donald Trump. The consequences have been massive.
As you mentioned, we did an emergency podcast Friday afternoon,
within hours of the meeting. We put it out. Normally
we put out pods Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. We put
out two pods on Friday, Friday morning and one Friday afternoon.
(01:02):
We did it because we wanted to cover what was
happening then because it was that consequential. So I will say,
as Ben just mentioned a minute ago, if you didn't
listen to Friday Afternoon's pod, I'd encourage you to go
back and listen to it. I believe this will go
down in history as the most disastrous Oval Office his
meeting that has ever occurred. We're going to break that down.
(01:23):
We're going to break down the fallout that has happened
in three days since that meeting. We're else going to
talk about the fact that tomorrow is the first State
of the Union address for the second Donald Trump term.
We're going to talk about what President Trump is likely
going to say tomorrow and how it's going to be received.
All on today's pod.
Speaker 1 (01:42):
Yeah, you got to love the Oscars.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
Every year gets more and more woke, and every time
when you think they're done, they'll.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
Double down on it.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
I want to talk to you real quick about an
incredible organization called the IFCJ and the work that they're
doing for the people in Israel. If you want to help,
then listen to me for the next minute. Because after
more than a year of war, terror and pain in Israel,
all of Israel is broken hearted after learning of the
(02:10):
tragic deaths of the Bis children who were held hostage
in Gaza, and so many are still hurting throughout the
Holy Land, where the need for aid continues to actually grow.
The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews has supported and
continues to support the families of hostages and other victims
of the October seventh terror attacks, and with your help,
(02:31):
IFCJ has provided financial and emotional help to hostages and
their families and to those healing and rebuilding their broken
homes and broken bodies. But the real work is just beginning,
and that's why your gift is helping to provide critically
needed support for families in Israel whose lives continue to
be destroyed by terror and uncertainty is Israel remains surrounded
(02:55):
by enemies. You can give a gift to bless Israel
and her people by this support IFCJ dot org. That's
one word support I f CJ dot org, or you
can call to give eight a eight for eight eight
I f CJ. That's triple eight for eight eight I
(03:16):
f CJ eight eight eight for eight eight I f CJ.
Are all online at support I f CJ dot Org.
All right, so let's give a quick recap of what
you mentioned a second ago. But you think this is
going to go down history. This meeting at the Oval
Office is maybe the worst Oval Office meeting in history.
(03:37):
It seems that Zelensky may be agreeing with you at
this point by the amount of backtracking he's done. He's
done some interviews, he's saying, we can get this done
with America. He ran to Europe begging for aid support,
help money, and now there's basically the UK and France
are like, you screwed up big. We're gonna try to
help you put this deal back together and will be
(04:00):
the liaison with the United States of America since you
screwed it up so badly.
Speaker 3 (04:05):
Well, Zelensky's Oval Office performance was disastrous, And listen, at
some level, it's not complicated what he had to do.
He was there to come to President Trump and seek
his help, seek his help, seek the United States to
stand with him in some way, shape or form in
their war with Russia. And Zelensky is belieguered, he's a
(04:28):
wartime leader. He feels desperate. But to be clear, the
United States is also his principal patron, his funder, the
person who has paid for the war for years, has
sent hundreds of billions of dollars to Ukraine. And so
in any sane and rational world, Zelensky would come into
(04:50):
the Oval Office hat in hand, would come into the
office being grateful for the support that the United States
has given, and to be honest, kissing Trump's ass. I
mean that this is not a complicated dynamic. And by
the way, it's also not a new dynamic. I've been
(05:12):
in a lot of Oval Office meetings. Just about every
foreign leader comes in and treats the President of the
United States with respect. That is incumbent on the office.
The United States is the world's leading superpower, and so
foreign leaders, foreign heads of state, whether they like the
president or not, they treat the president with respect. I
(05:34):
will tell you any president, if there were a foreign
leader who treated them the way Zelenski treated Trump, would
have been pissed off and the consequences would have been bad.
With Trump, the consequences were spectacularly bad. And listen, one
needn't be a forensic psychologist to understand that it is
(05:57):
a really dumb idea to go into a meeting with
Donald Trump and insult him and condescend him and attack him.
If you do that, Ben, I can actually give out
the probabilities to amazing precision. If you attack and insult
Donald Trump, the chances that he will punch back are
one hundred point zero zero zero percent, especially in every instance.
Speaker 1 (06:21):
Always I mean, yeah exactly, I mean.
Speaker 3 (06:23):
Behind Cloor on Global TV.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
Yeah, like, and that's the part where it was like
such shocking tone death and you and I mentioned this
in the pot on Friday. But the ambassador from the Ukraine,
I think she's said up perfectly, holding her head in
her hands, like this is a disaster that no one
knows how to fix.
Speaker 3 (06:44):
So look, I think the problem is Zelenski has been
surrounded by an echo chamber of left wing Democrats. He's
been piling around with Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi. He's
been piling around with Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. He's
been piling around with the New York Times and and
and he's become this is a guy who appears in
Vanity fairap, he appears in People magazine, and he's become
(07:07):
a leftist. Caused a joure and and he made I
think the stupid assessment of Gosh, all the people I
hang around with they hate Donald Trump. They think Donald
Trump is an idiot, So I should go in and
treat Donald Trump like he's an idiot. And and it
was I think he felt. I think Zelensky went into
(07:29):
the Oval performing for The New York Times and believing
that that that that the world be like, Oh, Zelensky
stands up and puts Trump in his place, ha, And
it was truly absurd. It backfired enormously. And by the way,
that this is the same political idiocy that led Zelensky
(07:52):
last fall to go and effectively do a campaign event
with Kamala Harris and Pennsylvania and to come to the
United States in the middle of the presidential campaign, to
come to the United States and do a New York
Times interview attacking Donald Trump a month out from the election.
And you and I did a whole pot at the time. God,
what the hell is wrong with this guy? Is he
(08:14):
just an idiot? Look, I don't know who's going to
win the race. Both you and I thought Trump was
gonna win, but nobody knew for sure. At a minimum,
Zelensky knew there was some real possibility that Trump was
going to be the president. Did he think it made sense?
Like what foreign leader comes. By the way, I wouldn't
have advocated Zelensky should come campaign for Trump either. He's
(08:35):
the president of Ukraine. He ought to be focused on
Ukraine and stay the hell out of our elections. Like
like it was an idiotic out of it.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
There's no upside to this.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
And then whoever wins, that's who you work with and
that's how it is, So why would you risk it?
Speaker 1 (08:49):
But this goes back to one of two things.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Is this because he is not a he's a fake
politician the sense where he's an actor that you know,
figured out a way to get this job and there's
no elections happening there right now. And he feels like
he believes the international press, which by the way, did
turn him into a rockstar. Mean, he became the Taylor
Swift of dudes in politics and was piped into the
(09:14):
award shows like we had on Sunday Night. I Mean,
this is a guy that I think started maybe believing
the press that he's untouchable.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
He's amazing, he's just incressible leader.
Speaker 3 (09:25):
Look, he thinks he's George Washington. He thinks he's Winston Churchill.
He thinks he is he is larger than life, and
everyone around him, and particularly Donald Trump, are just beneath him,
and that arrogance and condescension came out, and it really
is I think it's it's the danger of believing your
own pr like believing your own bs.
Speaker 1 (09:47):
Listen.
Speaker 3 (09:47):
I've met Zelensky multiple times. You know, people ask me,
all right, is the guy totally and utterly corrupt? And look,
I want to urge our verdict. Listeners, there is a
danger in talking about Ukraine and foreign policy to fall
into extremes and to say either Zolensky is a glorious
(10:10):
hero defending liberty and everyone with morality will stand against
him against the worst skirt humanity has ever seen, Vladimir Putin.
That's one view I think. I don't think that view
is right. There is another view, which, if you spend
your time on Twitter you could see as the sort
of countervailing view, which is Zelensky is a corrupt, evil autocrat,
(10:33):
He's a Nazi, he's a terrible human being. He started
the war against Russia, and Vladimir Putin is a misunderstood
kind soul who we just need to embrace because he's
a giant teddy bear and we need to love. Unsurprisingly,
that view isn't right either. And one of the things
look that I love about doing a podcast. If you
(10:56):
do a TV or radio interview, both you and I
have done a ton of Time Raider interviews. If you've
got five or six minutes to discuss an issue, you
got to talk about it in a quick, little SoundBite,
You got to talk about it a sentence or two.
This podcast, we can actually talk about issues and don't
fall into the mistakes of believing the extremes on either
(11:18):
side my view of this. Has Ukraine struggled with corruption, Yes,
it has for a long time been one of the
most corrupt countries in Europe. There's been endemic corruption throughout
the government, throughout the economy. Absolutely. Yes, is Zelensky implicated
in that, I don't know, but given the history of
corruption in his country, it's not reasonable to acknowledge there's
(11:40):
some reasonable possibility. It's not unreasonable to acknowledge there's some
reasonable possibility of that. The United States has also been
shoveling hundreds of billions of dollars to this war with
no accountability. It's been dragging on forever, and people are
tired of it. People want it to be over. Donald
Trump campaigned on where going to end the war in Ukraine.
Enough is enough. We're not sending our money there anymore.
(12:02):
That is a mandate that came out of the election.
Now you may not like that, you may not agree
with it. But Trump was not hiding that was the
outcome he wanted. Kamala Harris was not hiding the outcome
she wanted, which is to pay for the war forever
and ever and ever, and keep shoveling cash to Ukraine
no matter what. But by the way, not enough cash
that they win, and not cutting off the money to Iran,
(12:24):
which is making drones and sending him to Russia that
it's using them to kill Ukrainian soldiers and civilians. So
fund both sides in perpetuity to keep the war machine going.
That was Kamala's position. The voters voted for Trump, that
mandate means something. But I will say, if you look
at the aftermath of the Zelensky Oval Office meeting, it
(12:45):
was a disastrous meeting for Ukraine. I actually think because
Zelenski's performance was so bad, it was not a good
meeting for America. Zelensky did harm to America too. Why
because who was happiest in the world about that meeting?
And the answer is Vladimir Putin. I think Putin was
laughing his ass off as he watched that because Zelensky
(13:07):
was such a hirk that he did real damage to Ukraine.
And the consequence of Zelenski's behavior is it benefits Russia,
and benefiting Russia is not good for America. I do
want to urge everyone who listens to this podcast, is
I watch Twitter. We're so captured by tribalism that there
(13:31):
are people on the right who are fed up with
the Joe Biden's and Kamala Harris's and the virtue signaling
on Ukraine that they've decided Putin is just awesome. Let
me be clear, Putin is a KGB thug. He is
a murderer. Putin is not our friend. And Putin's ambitions
(13:51):
you don't have to intuit them, you don't have to
infer them. He has told us his ambitions. He has
said that he believes the greatest geo political disaster of
the twentieth century is the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
He wants to reassemble the Soviet Union. In fact, he
said more. He said he wants to go back to
the old Russian Russian Empire before the Soviet Union, but
(14:12):
that was even broader, and that had Russia controlling much
of modern Europe. That would be a disastrous outcome for America.
My views America first, which means I want our allies
to be strong and I want our enemies to be weak.
It's the reason I've urged President Trump. Yes, you campaigned
(14:33):
on we should end the war in Europe. Enough is enough,
stop sending money. But we want a negotiated outcome that
is a clear loss for Russia. Why, because Russia is
our enemy. Putin is our enemy, and we don't want
our enemy made stronger. Zelenski's performance was so bad, so outrageous,
so infuriating, that Zelenski increased the chances of an outcome
(14:58):
that benefits Putin, and then that is bad for Ukraine,
bad for America, and bad for the.
Speaker 1 (15:03):
World, which brings us to now where we are.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
And look, you've got uk in, France and Ukraine that
have agreed to quote work on a ceasefire plan and
try to get I guess Zolensky back into a conversation
with the President of the United States of America. They're
having this big meeting over in Europe. A lot of
different countries are there. The summit includes France, Germany, Denmark, Italy,
(15:31):
the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Spain, Canada, Finland, Sweden, Chez Republic
in Romania, the Turkish Foreign Minister, the NATO Security General,
and the Presidence of the European Commission and the European
Council will also attend. Now you notice I didn't say
the United States of America. This is part of I
think the most interesting part of President Trump's meeting with Zelenski.
(15:52):
It's like, look, you take us for granted. You come
in here, you lecture us, you have no plan for peace.
You clearly aren't here for peace.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
Good luck.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
And now all of these other leaders are having to
step up and say, okay, let us try to help
you fix this so that we can save your country
because he did so much harm to Ukraine.
Speaker 3 (16:13):
And look, I say, great, if Europe wants to step
up and fund the war for another year, knock yourselves out, guys,
like our checkbook is done. But it is striking. It's
an indication of just how disastrous. Zelensky's meeting was that
he immediately ran to the United Kingdom to France to
(16:35):
meet with the King of England. All right, here's one
story from NPR. UK Prime minister on veil steps towards
a Ukraine peace deal urges US cooperation. Here's what NPR
reports quote. British Prime Minister kir Starmer on Sunday laid
out of framework for a plan to end Russia's war
in Ukraine, one where Europe will lead the charge for
securing peace yay, while still relying heavily on US backing boo.
(17:00):
The proposal is the result of emergency talks held by
European leaders in London following President Trump's heated exchange with
Ukrainian President of Vladimir Zelenski at the end at the
White House last week. Over the weekend, leaders from over
a dozen countries got together to discuss a roadmap for
peace and security for Ukraine as the country faces its
third year of war with Russia. The emergency summit was
(17:22):
also aimed at working to preserve Ukraine's relationship with the
US and Americans involvement in the war overseas. Starmer said
that Europe must do the quote heavy lifting to secure
a lasting peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine, and that
the UK should lead the front. He emphasized that quote
this effort must have strong US backing, which if he
means more hundreds of billions of dollars, the answer is no,
(17:45):
thank you. But he continues quote. Through my discussions over
recent days, we've agreed that the UK, France and others
will work with Ukraine on a plan to stop the fighting,
Starmar sent at a press conference on Sunday. Then we'll
discuss that plan with the United States and take it
for we're together now. It's interesting to do so. Starmar
valve the United Kingdom would ramp up at support for Ukraine.
(18:08):
That included a loan of what do you think?
Speaker 1 (18:11):
A lot of money? Right?
Speaker 3 (18:12):
What do you think? Pick a number?
Speaker 2 (18:15):
Oh gosh, see, this is when you get me in trouble,
because I'm going to either be way too low or
way too high.
Speaker 1 (18:20):
Let's call it.
Speaker 3 (18:23):
Fifty million, so higher than that, so you're even more pessimistic.
Speaker 1 (18:29):
Okay.
Speaker 3 (18:30):
That includes a loan of two point twenty six billion
British points two point eight four billion dollars, So look
two point eight four billion dollars. That's real money, except
for the fact that the United States has spent about
one hundred and seventy five billion dollars on Ukraine. That's
part of the fundamental imbalance there.
Speaker 2 (18:48):
Well, look, I love the breath thing about finding money,
like you go back to Trump saying like, we're no
longer just an open blank check. There was also something
else that was said that Europe quote needs to step
in and release some two hundred billion euros it's two
hundred and seven billion in quote seized Russian assets to
help fund the war efforts. So all of a sudden
(19:10):
they're now saying, well, we got two hundred billion or
two hundred and seven billion in US dollars two hundred
billion euros of seize Russian assets. Maybe we should use
that money instead of our own money to help them
in Ukraine. And I'm like, wow, you turn off this
picket in America, a brilliant, simple plan, and all of
a sudden they find two hundred billion euros sitting around
(19:31):
They're like, Okay, maybe we can give that.
Speaker 1 (19:32):
To them now. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (19:34):
Look, I'm all for the Europeans stepping in and doing
everything they can if they want to do that, knock
yourself out. They're welcome to spend their money, but we're
not the welfare provider for the world. And to be clear,
why are we borrowing when we got thirty six trillion
dollars in debt? Why are we borrowing money from China
to give it to other countries. That makes no sense,
(19:58):
and it is an interesting shift.
Speaker 1 (20:00):
Now.
Speaker 3 (20:00):
Look, I will say one of the frustrating things about
this meeting last week in the Oval is the meeting
was there to sign an agreement, an agreement that had
been negotiated ahead of time. And that agreement was an
agreement where Ukraine would give the United States a substantial
interest in its rare earth minerals and valuable resources to
(20:23):
pay back the one hundred and seventy five billion dollars
we've given them. That agreement made a lot of sense.
That agreement was pre negotiated. I think the White House
thought Zelensky was going to show up, sign the agreement
and leave. He didn't. Instead, he put on this performance.
And I actually want you to listen to this exchange
on CNN because it's a striking exchange. The first speaker
(20:47):
of Scott Jennings, who by the way. Scott Jennings is
doing a phenomenal job on CNN, being a voice of
reason and common sense fighting against a bunch of numb
nuts and left wing comedies. Really doing an effective job.
And he's in this case talking with Josh Rogan. Josh
Rogan is is a very smart reporter for Washington Post Intelligence.
(21:12):
He does foreign policy. But look, Josh Rogan and Scott
Jennings do not often agree. Listen to this back and
forth as they're analyzing what happened with Zelensky in the
Oval office.
Speaker 4 (21:25):
I don't know if he needs an apology. He needs
Zelensky to recognize the position that he's in. We're see
you as what We're their patron, we're their best hope
for the killing to stop and for them to emerge
from this sovereign and prosperous. And we're also their best
hope as a business partner. I mean, all Zelensky had
to do today was put on a tie, show up, smile,
(21:46):
say thank you, sign the papers, and have lunch.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
That's it.
Speaker 4 (21:51):
And he couldn't do that. And this followed ten days
of being difficult in private and now one day of
being stupid and public. I want this did not have
to go down this way. And however you feel about
why it started, why it's going on, who's right and
who's wrong. We can help them in this and come
out okay on the other side. And he's making it
(22:12):
hard now. First of all, I can't believe I'm about
to say this, but I actually agree with Scott and
everything that he said was basically right.
Speaker 1 (22:19):
Wow.
Speaker 4 (22:20):
I know I'm going to get killed on social media
for admitting that, but so be. I have a short
answer on this, and so the short answer is the
Trump administration believes that if Ukraine goes into business with
the United States, that in and of itself is a
security guarantee. If if your interests become our interests, we're
(22:40):
going to be interested in making sure our interests are secure.
So it would have been wise for him to understand
the economic deal, the mineral deal is a security guarantee
in and of itself, and he lost sight of that
today in the arguments premedity.
Speaker 1 (22:53):
I don't know.
Speaker 4 (22:54):
I think Zelenski misplayed it in the room, and you
can and we could disagree about Jade Vance's position on
it or agree on it. But either way, Zolensky certainly
had been briefed on what the right way to handle
this was, and all he had to do was walk
in there and say, thank you, I'm really grateful to
be here. We want to be partners with the United States.
(23:14):
We're grateful for your leadership. Where's the papers? And what
are we having for lunch? That's all he had to do.
And look, the posturing doesn't have to occur now. If
he is serious about wanting peace and ending this war,
you don't have to keep posturing as a tough guy.
Everybody knows you're tough, all right. The Ukrainians are tough,
they're brave, they're fighting a much larger country. Everybody knows.
(23:35):
The question for Zelensky is can you take off the
military uniform and put on the uniform of diplomacy. He
failed to test it.
Speaker 2 (23:42):
He failed diplomacy that test today. It was not a
hard meeting. This wasn't something that was gonna It was
harder to screw it up than it was to get
it right.
Speaker 3 (23:52):
Look, he needed mostly to be saying sir, yes, sir,
thank you, sir.
Speaker 1 (23:57):
May I have another.
Speaker 3 (24:00):
It? And Scott is right. Look, this deal on minerals
had the advantage for Ukraine of having the Trump administration
being an integally involved economic partner with Ukraine, that's really beneficial.
And the alternative is very different, which is without the
(24:24):
United States, Ukraine's prospects are really dim. And so if
you know that your prospects for success are miserably sad
unless President Trump supports you, in what universe do you
come in and start attacking and insulting him?
Speaker 1 (24:44):
Yeah, it doesn't.
Speaker 2 (24:46):
And this is now how fast can Europe get this
back together? But I do love they found billions and
billions and billions of Russian assets, Like, oh well, maybe
instead of our taxpayers over in Europe paying them giving them,
maybe we just take this money we can we've seized
and frozen, and then we'll use that in the war effort.
That makes more sense for the short term. So we're
(25:09):
going to go down that road. It's amazing how fast
Europe found cash when America said it no more from us,
We're not going to be suckers, Which brings me to
tomorrow night. Let's just have a little fun with this
for a second. Because you mentioned earlier to State of
the Union, others are going to say, well, technically, it's
a joint session of Congress. Can we explain very quickly
(25:31):
why the first time the president addresses a joint session
of Congress it's not technically called to state the Union,
but afterwards it is okay.
Speaker 3 (25:39):
So I believe tomorrow's address is a state of the Union.
You're right, but I think the sort of tradition is wrong.
The origin of the state of the Union comes from
the text of the Constitution. Article two, Section three provides, quote,
he the President shall from time to time give to
the Congress information of the state of the Union, and
(26:00):
recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge
necessary and expedient. And so that's the origin of it
that the Constitution says he shall give to Congress information
on the state of the Union. Now, traditionally, the first
address the president gives when he's newly elected is not
(26:22):
called a state of the Union address. It's rather just
called an address to a joint Session of Congress. And
traditionally the first state of the Union is the second
address he gives. So a year from now that will
be called a state of the Union. In my view,
the plain text of the Constitution is of the presidents
giving Congress his views on the state of the Union.
It's a State of the Union address, and so I
(26:44):
think the tradition is wrong. Now it's interesting if you
go and look at the history of it. Initially it
started in writing, so George Washington set written messages to
Congress instead of delivering them in person. So did John
Adams to Thomas Jefferson. So it started out that the
State of the Union was delivered in writing. Then Woodrow
(27:05):
Wilson in nineteen thirteen delivered his message in person, and
Franklin Roosevelt did the same. The first radio broadcast of
the State of the Union was in nineteen twenty three,
and the first televised advised address was in nineteen forty seven.
And it wasn't until nineteen sixty five, which is not
really that long ago, that President Johnson began delivering the
(27:29):
address in primetime, and then in nineteen sixty six the
opposition party began offering a televised response to the president's speech.
So today we think of it as a national speech
that's covered on TV on every one of the stations.
It didn't start out that way, but tomorrow we're going
to see exactly that, a national speech given to the country,
(27:51):
given to a Joint Session of Congress. I'll be sitting
there on the floor of the House listening to it,
and as will millions of people across America and all
across the world.
Speaker 1 (28:02):
What do you expect in this speech?
Speaker 2 (28:04):
I mean, this is going to be one where I
think it's going to be a lot about A we
one B this is what we're getting done for the
American people. I think the present understands how important this
speech is to continue momentum moving forward for DOGE and
other things. But I actually think this is one of
the most important speeches he's going to give because this
is at that critical moment where it's like, all right,
(28:27):
you know, are we winning. Yes, here's what we're doing,
Here's what we promised we were going to do, and
keep supporting and backing us because we're all in.
Speaker 3 (28:36):
So my prediction is the theme of the speech will
be promises made, promises kept, and it will have many
similar themes that the inauguration speech had about the mandate
from the last election. But the difference is going to
be the inauguration speech was on the first day of
the second term, so at that point nothing had happened yet.
(28:57):
It was literally raising his hand and taking the oath
of office is what made him president. So we hadn't
been able to do anything yet this second term when
he gave that speech. In this instance, we have seen
the most consequential first forty days of a president in history.
There's never been a president hit the ground running the
way Donald Trump has. There's never been a president issue
(29:19):
as many executive orders do as much as Donald Trump is,
and so I expect the speech to be number one.
I expect a lot of focus on the border. So
on the border, I think the President is going to say,
we had chaos, we had open borders, we had twelve
million illegal immigrants, we had the worst illegal immigration in
the history of our country. We had an invasion at
(29:39):
our southern border. The American people said enough is enough
is enough. I expect the President to point to in
the gallery victims of illegal immigration. I expect to see
the families of people who were murdered by illegal immigrants,
whether lacoln Riley or Joscelyn Nungary or Rachel Morin. I
(30:01):
expect to see the families, uh to highlight this was
a tragedy, it was wrong, and Americans were suffering every
damn day as I put it at at the RNC
convention this year, and we've seen in just forty days
the number of illegal crossings plummet over ninety percent. I
(30:22):
fully expect President Trump to say, you elected me to
fix this problem, and we are fixing the problem. If
you're a murderer, if you're a rapist, if you're a
child molester, if you're a Venezuelan gang member, get the
hell out because if you do it, don't We're going
to find you. We're going to arrest you, We're going
to deport you. We will secure the border. And that's
(30:43):
a promise made and a promise kept. I think that's
going to be a major major theme.
Speaker 2 (30:47):
I think entertant on enter how important do you think
this is? I mean, is this one of those where
your ik if you're able to.
Speaker 3 (30:55):
Look, I think it's important. I don't think it is,
you know, game changing either way. I think the President
will do a good job. I got to say State
of the Unions are always interesting, and we'll talk about
on Wednesday's pod.
Speaker 1 (31:08):
We'll talk about how.
Speaker 3 (31:10):
It was, and so you and I will record this
after the State of the Union. That's going to be
a brutal one. By the way, because the State of
the Union goes on forever. And then I typically do
various media. I don't know if I'm doing Hannity. I
often do Hannity after State of the Unions. But I'll
do some media and then you and I will record
the pod at midnight or one in the morning. So
(31:30):
but we will record it and I will give you
my real time assessments of how it went. But look,
I think the President is going to do a terrific
job with it. And I don't know that it matters.
I don't know that it will change anything fundamentally other
than I think a lot of people. You will have
tens of millions of people watching, and you will have
even more globally watching. And I think the basic message
(31:53):
the American people voted, they elected us, they gave us
a mandate, and we are on that mandate. We are
producing results, We're doing what the voters sent us here
to do. I think that message is really important, and
I think that message will be conveyed. I'm glad of that.
(32:15):
I think that's really important. By the way, I'll say
one of the things that I'm looking forward to so
later today I'm going to do an event in the
Capitol with the First Lady with Melania Trump. I'm going
to do an event with the First Lady on my
legislation to take it down. Legislation to take it down.
Legislation protects young girls, protects women from so called revenge porn,
(32:42):
protects them from deep fakes. So we've seen multiple instances.
We've seen teenage girls who won from Texas. Elliston Berry,
who was a freshman in high school, and she woke
up one morning and a classmate of hers, a boy
in ninth grade, had taken a perfectly innocuous picture of
(33:03):
her from social media, had used AI to create a
deep fake to make it look like they were naked
pictures of her. They were not real. They were fake,
but if you looked at them, you thought they were real.
The AI technology is such that you can't tell. And
this boider class had sent it to her classmates, and
this poor girl woke up in tears. If you can
imagine you and I are both parents, it's hard to
(33:25):
be a teenager anytime, but for a young girl to
have all your classmates think they're looking at naked pictures
of you, or in some instances, you have deep fake
videos where they can create pornographic videos of real people
that look like they're engaged in lude and explicit acts.
And my legislation that Take It Down Act makes it
(33:47):
number one a crime to post non consensual intimate images
and number two, whether real or deep fakes made using AI.
And number two it puts an obligation on social media
place platforms, and tech platforms to take this garbage down
when the victims notified them. In Elliston's situation, I met
with her. She reached out to me as her senator
(34:10):
and raised this And it's actually how I encountered the
issue because it was it was it was a concern
raised by a constituent, and I drafted this legislation in
response to her concerns. I met with her and her mom.
At the time, the pictures had been up on Snapchat
for nine months, and I asked her and her mom.
I said, well, what's the story with the pictures now?
And her mom said they're still up and they said.
(34:34):
Her mom said, I've called Snapchat, I've emailed them, I've
gone round and round and round. They will not take
them down. And I turned to my team, I said,
damn it, I want you to get the CEO of
Snapchat on the phone right now this afternoon, and I said,
those pictures will be down today.
Speaker 1 (34:53):
Ben.
Speaker 3 (34:53):
They pulled the pictures down within two hours. And you
know what, it should not take a sitting United States
Senator to make a phone call to make that happen.
The victim ought to have the right to get that down.
And so my legislation puts a legal obligation on the
part of the tech platform if the victim notifies them,
they have to take it down. So tomorrow I'm going
to do an event at the Capitol with the First
(35:14):
Lady of Milania Trump. We're gonna have Elliston, Barry Is there,
We're gonna have other victims who have been victims there
to highlight this legislation. My bill has already passed the
Senate one hundred and nothing. I believe we'll get it
through the House, and I think you could see the
President talking about issues like that at the State of
the Union as well, laying out we have a mandate
we're going to deliver and here's what we're delivering already.
Speaker 1 (35:36):
That's awesome.
Speaker 2 (35:38):
Well, we're going to have a big show after the
joint Address State of the Union, on, so get ready
for that. Make sure you get that subscriber auto download
button wherever you get this podcast, and please share it
on social media if you would rune us a five
star review. We'd also greatly appreciate that it helps us
reach a new audience every time you do that, So
(35:58):
if you'll do that as well, that would be huge,
And the Senator I will see you back here on
Wednesday morning.
Well, happy Monday. Welcome.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
It is Verdict with Center, Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you.
And if you missed our podcast that we did over
the weekend on the Zolensky disaster in the Oval Office,
I'm going to tell you right now. We put out
that emergency pod. Go back, listen to it, grab it.
That's why if you have any of that subscribe auto
down with button, make sure you do that so you
never miss when those big moments happen and we get
(00:25):
together and do a show real quick, Senator, We've got
a lot happening right now, including a joint session of Congress.
It's going to happen on Tuesday. But Zolensky left the
White House and he hauled it to Europe begging for money.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Well, the fallout continues from the epic meeting last week
between Presidents Zelensky and Donald Trump. The consequences have been massive.
As you mentioned, we did an emergency podcast Friday afternoon,
within hours of the meeting. We put it out. Normally
we put out pods Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. We put
out two pods on Friday, Friday morning and one Friday afternoon.
(01:02):
We did it because we wanted to cover what was
happening then because it was that consequential. So I will say,
as Ben just mentioned a minute ago, if you didn't
listen to Friday Afternoon's pod, I'd encourage you to go
back and listen to it. I believe this will go
down in history as the most disastrous Oval Office his
meeting that has ever occurred. We're going to break that down.
(01:23):
We're going to break down the fallout that has happened
in three days since that meeting. We're else going to
talk about the fact that tomorrow is the first State
of the Union address for the second Donald Trump term.
We're going to talk about what President Trump is likely
going to say tomorrow and how it's going to be received.
All on today's pod.
Speaker 1 (01:42):
Yeah, you got to love the Oscars.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
Every year gets more and more woke, and every time
when you think they're done, they'll.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
Double down on it.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
I want to talk to you real quick about an
incredible organization called the IFCJ and the work that they're
doing for the people in Israel. If you want to help,
then listen to me for the next minute. Because after
more than a year of war, terror and pain in Israel,
all of Israel is broken hearted after learning of the
(02:10):
tragic deaths of the Bis children who were held hostage
in Gaza, and so many are still hurting throughout the
Holy Land, where the need for aid continues to actually grow.
The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews has supported and
continues to support the families of hostages and other victims
of the October seventh terror attacks, and with your help,
(02:31):
IFCJ has provided financial and emotional help to hostages and
their families and to those healing and rebuilding their broken
homes and broken bodies. But the real work is just beginning,
and that's why your gift is helping to provide critically
needed support for families in Israel whose lives continue to
be destroyed by terror and uncertainty is Israel remains surrounded
(02:55):
by enemies. You can give a gift to bless Israel
and her people by this support IFCJ dot org. That's
one word support I f CJ dot org, or you
can call to give eight a eight for eight eight
I f CJ. That's triple eight for eight eight I
(03:16):
f CJ eight eight eight for eight eight I f CJ.
Are all online at support I f CJ dot Org.
All right, so let's give a quick recap of what
you mentioned a second ago. But you think this is
going to go down history. This meeting at the Oval
Office is maybe the worst Oval Office meeting in history.
(03:37):
It seems that Zelensky may be agreeing with you at
this point by the amount of backtracking he's done. He's
done some interviews, he's saying, we can get this done
with America. He ran to Europe begging for aid support,
help money, and now there's basically the UK and France
are like, you screwed up big. We're gonna try to
help you put this deal back together and will be
(04:00):
the liaison with the United States of America since you
screwed it up so badly.
Speaker 3 (04:05):
Well, Zelensky's Oval Office performance was disastrous, And listen, at
some level, it's not complicated what he had to do.
He was there to come to President Trump and seek
his help, seek his help, seek the United States to
stand with him in some way, shape or form in
their war with Russia. And Zelensky is belieguered, he's a
(04:28):
wartime leader. He feels desperate. But to be clear, the
United States is also his principal patron, his funder, the
person who has paid for the war for years, has
sent hundreds of billions of dollars to Ukraine. And so
in any sane and rational world, Zelensky would come into
(04:50):
the Oval Office hat in hand, would come into the
office being grateful for the support that the United States
has given, and to be honest, kissing Trump's ass. I
mean that this is not a complicated dynamic. And by
the way, it's also not a new dynamic. I've been
(05:12):
in a lot of Oval Office meetings. Just about every
foreign leader comes in and treats the President of the
United States with respect. That is incumbent on the office.
The United States is the world's leading superpower, and so
foreign leaders, foreign heads of state, whether they like the
president or not, they treat the president with respect. I
(05:34):
will tell you any president, if there were a foreign
leader who treated them the way Zelenski treated Trump, would
have been pissed off and the consequences would have been bad.
With Trump, the consequences were spectacularly bad. And listen, one
needn't be a forensic psychologist to understand that it is
(05:57):
a really dumb idea to go into a meeting with
Donald Trump and insult him and condescend him and attack him.
If you do that, Ben, I can actually give out
the probabilities to amazing precision. If you attack and insult
Donald Trump, the chances that he will punch back are
one hundred point zero zero zero percent, especially in every instance.
Speaker 1 (06:21):
Always I mean, yeah exactly, I mean.
Speaker 3 (06:23):
Behind Cloor on Global TV.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
Yeah, like, and that's the part where it was like
such shocking tone death and you and I mentioned this
in the pot on Friday. But the ambassador from the Ukraine,
I think she's said up perfectly, holding her head in
her hands, like this is a disaster that no one
knows how to fix.
Speaker 3 (06:44):
So look, I think the problem is Zelenski has been
surrounded by an echo chamber of left wing Democrats. He's
been piling around with Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi. He's
been piling around with Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. He's
been piling around with the New York Times and and
and he's become this is a guy who appears in
Vanity fairap, he appears in People magazine, and he's become
(07:07):
a leftist. Caused a joure and and he made I
think the stupid assessment of Gosh, all the people I
hang around with they hate Donald Trump. They think Donald
Trump is an idiot, So I should go in and
treat Donald Trump like he's an idiot. And and it
was I think he felt. I think Zelensky went into
(07:29):
the Oval performing for The New York Times and believing
that that that that the world be like, Oh, Zelensky
stands up and puts Trump in his place, ha, And
it was truly absurd. It backfired enormously. And by the way,
that this is the same political idiocy that led Zelensky
(07:52):
last fall to go and effectively do a campaign event
with Kamala Harris and Pennsylvania and to come to the
United States in the middle of the presidential campaign, to
come to the United States and do a New York
Times interview attacking Donald Trump a month out from the election.
And you and I did a whole pot at the time. God,
what the hell is wrong with this guy? Is he
(08:14):
just an idiot? Look, I don't know who's going to
win the race. Both you and I thought Trump was
gonna win, but nobody knew for sure. At a minimum,
Zelensky knew there was some real possibility that Trump was
going to be the president. Did he think it made sense?
Like what foreign leader comes. By the way, I wouldn't
have advocated Zelensky should come campaign for Trump either. He's
(08:35):
the president of Ukraine. He ought to be focused on
Ukraine and stay the hell out of our elections. Like
like it was an idiotic out of it.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
There's no upside to this.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
And then whoever wins, that's who you work with and
that's how it is, So why would you risk it?
Speaker 1 (08:49):
But this goes back to one of two things.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Is this because he is not a he's a fake
politician the sense where he's an actor that you know,
figured out a way to get this job and there's
no elections happening there right now. And he feels like
he believes the international press, which by the way, did
turn him into a rockstar. Mean, he became the Taylor
Swift of dudes in politics and was piped into the
(09:14):
award shows like we had on Sunday Night. I Mean,
this is a guy that I think started maybe believing
the press that he's untouchable.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
He's amazing, he's just incressible leader.
Speaker 3 (09:25):
Look, he thinks he's George Washington. He thinks he's Winston Churchill.
He thinks he is he is larger than life, and
everyone around him, and particularly Donald Trump, are just beneath him,
and that arrogance and condescension came out, and it really
is I think it's it's the danger of believing your
own pr like believing your own bs.
Speaker 1 (09:47):
Listen.
Speaker 3 (09:47):
I've met Zelensky multiple times. You know, people ask me,
all right, is the guy totally and utterly corrupt? And look,
I want to urge our verdict. Listeners, there is a
danger in talking about Ukraine and foreign policy to fall
into extremes and to say either Zolensky is a glorious
(10:10):
hero defending liberty and everyone with morality will stand against
him against the worst skirt humanity has ever seen, Vladimir Putin.
That's one view I think. I don't think that view
is right. There is another view, which, if you spend
your time on Twitter you could see as the sort
of countervailing view, which is Zelensky is a corrupt, evil autocrat,
(10:33):
He's a Nazi, he's a terrible human being. He started
the war against Russia, and Vladimir Putin is a misunderstood
kind soul who we just need to embrace because he's
a giant teddy bear and we need to love. Unsurprisingly,
that view isn't right either. And one of the things
look that I love about doing a podcast. If you
(10:56):
do a TV or radio interview, both you and I
have done a ton of Time Raider interviews. If you've
got five or six minutes to discuss an issue, you
got to talk about it in a quick, little SoundBite,
You got to talk about it a sentence or two.
This podcast, we can actually talk about issues and don't
fall into the mistakes of believing the extremes on either
(11:18):
side my view of this. Has Ukraine struggled with corruption, Yes,
it has for a long time been one of the
most corrupt countries in Europe. There's been endemic corruption throughout
the government, throughout the economy. Absolutely. Yes, is Zelensky implicated
in that, I don't know, but given the history of
corruption in his country, it's not reasonable to acknowledge there's
(11:40):
some reasonable possibility. It's not unreasonable to acknowledge there's some
reasonable possibility of that. The United States has also been
shoveling hundreds of billions of dollars to this war with
no accountability. It's been dragging on forever, and people are
tired of it. People want it to be over. Donald
Trump campaigned on where going to end the war in Ukraine.
Enough is enough. We're not sending our money there anymore.
(12:02):
That is a mandate that came out of the election.
Now you may not like that, you may not agree
with it. But Trump was not hiding that was the
outcome he wanted. Kamala Harris was not hiding the outcome
she wanted, which is to pay for the war forever
and ever and ever, and keep shoveling cash to Ukraine
no matter what. But by the way, not enough cash
that they win, and not cutting off the money to Iran,
(12:24):
which is making drones and sending him to Russia that
it's using them to kill Ukrainian soldiers and civilians. So
fund both sides in perpetuity to keep the war machine going.
That was Kamala's position. The voters voted for Trump, that
mandate means something. But I will say, if you look
at the aftermath of the Zelensky Oval Office meeting, it
(12:45):
was a disastrous meeting for Ukraine. I actually think because
Zelenski's performance was so bad, it was not a good
meeting for America. Zelensky did harm to America too. Why
because who was happiest in the world about that meeting?
And the answer is Vladimir Putin. I think Putin was
laughing his ass off as he watched that because Zelensky
(13:07):
was such a hirk that he did real damage to Ukraine.
And the consequence of Zelenski's behavior is it benefits Russia,
and benefiting Russia is not good for America. I do
want to urge everyone who listens to this podcast, is
I watch Twitter. We're so captured by tribalism that there
(13:31):
are people on the right who are fed up with
the Joe Biden's and Kamala Harris's and the virtue signaling
on Ukraine that they've decided Putin is just awesome. Let
me be clear, Putin is a KGB thug. He is
a murderer. Putin is not our friend. And Putin's ambitions
(13:51):
you don't have to intuit them, you don't have to
infer them. He has told us his ambitions. He has
said that he believes the greatest geo political disaster of
the twentieth century is the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
He wants to reassemble the Soviet Union. In fact, he
said more. He said he wants to go back to
the old Russian Russian Empire before the Soviet Union, but
(14:12):
that was even broader, and that had Russia controlling much
of modern Europe. That would be a disastrous outcome for America.
My views America first, which means I want our allies
to be strong and I want our enemies to be weak.
It's the reason I've urged President Trump. Yes, you campaigned
(14:33):
on we should end the war in Europe. Enough is enough,
stop sending money. But we want a negotiated outcome that
is a clear loss for Russia. Why, because Russia is
our enemy. Putin is our enemy, and we don't want
our enemy made stronger. Zelenski's performance was so bad, so outrageous,
so infuriating, that Zelenski increased the chances of an outcome
(14:58):
that benefits Putin, and then that is bad for Ukraine,
bad for America, and bad for the.
Speaker 1 (15:03):
World, which brings us to now where we are.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
And look, you've got uk in, France and Ukraine that
have agreed to quote work on a ceasefire plan and
try to get I guess Zolensky back into a conversation
with the President of the United States of America. They're
having this big meeting over in Europe. A lot of
different countries are there. The summit includes France, Germany, Denmark, Italy,
(15:31):
the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Spain, Canada, Finland, Sweden, Chez Republic
in Romania, the Turkish Foreign Minister, the NATO Security General,
and the Presidence of the European Commission and the European
Council will also attend. Now you notice I didn't say
the United States of America. This is part of I
think the most interesting part of President Trump's meeting with Zelenski.
(15:52):
It's like, look, you take us for granted. You come
in here, you lecture us, you have no plan for peace.
You clearly aren't here for peace.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
Good luck.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
And now all of these other leaders are having to
step up and say, okay, let us try to help
you fix this so that we can save your country
because he did so much harm to Ukraine.
Speaker 3 (16:13):
And look, I say, great, if Europe wants to step
up and fund the war for another year, knock yourselves out, guys,
like our checkbook is done. But it is striking. It's
an indication of just how disastrous. Zelensky's meeting was that
he immediately ran to the United Kingdom to France to
(16:35):
meet with the King of England. All right, here's one
story from NPR. UK Prime minister on veil steps towards
a Ukraine peace deal urges US cooperation. Here's what NPR
reports quote. British Prime Minister kir Starmer on Sunday laid
out of framework for a plan to end Russia's war
in Ukraine, one where Europe will lead the charge for
securing peace yay, while still relying heavily on US backing boo.
(17:00):
The proposal is the result of emergency talks held by
European leaders in London following President Trump's heated exchange with
Ukrainian President of Vladimir Zelenski at the end at the
White House last week. Over the weekend, leaders from over
a dozen countries got together to discuss a roadmap for
peace and security for Ukraine as the country faces its
third year of war with Russia. The emergency summit was
(17:22):
also aimed at working to preserve Ukraine's relationship with the
US and Americans involvement in the war overseas. Starmer said
that Europe must do the quote heavy lifting to secure
a lasting peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine, and that
the UK should lead the front. He emphasized that quote
this effort must have strong US backing, which if he
means more hundreds of billions of dollars, the answer is no,
(17:45):
thank you. But he continues quote. Through my discussions over
recent days, we've agreed that the UK, France and others
will work with Ukraine on a plan to stop the fighting,
Starmar sent at a press conference on Sunday. Then we'll
discuss that plan with the United States and take it
for we're together now. It's interesting to do so. Starmar
valve the United Kingdom would ramp up at support for Ukraine.
(18:08):
That included a loan of what do you think?
Speaker 1 (18:11):
A lot of money? Right?
Speaker 3 (18:12):
What do you think? Pick a number?
Speaker 2 (18:15):
Oh gosh, see, this is when you get me in trouble,
because I'm going to either be way too low or
way too high.
Speaker 1 (18:20):
Let's call it.
Speaker 3 (18:23):
Fifty million, so higher than that, so you're even more pessimistic.
Speaker 1 (18:29):
Okay.
Speaker 3 (18:30):
That includes a loan of two point twenty six billion
British points two point eight four billion dollars, So look
two point eight four billion dollars. That's real money, except
for the fact that the United States has spent about
one hundred and seventy five billion dollars on Ukraine. That's
part of the fundamental imbalance there.
Speaker 2 (18:48):
Well, look, I love the breath thing about finding money,
like you go back to Trump saying like, we're no
longer just an open blank check. There was also something
else that was said that Europe quote needs to step
in and release some two hundred billion euros it's two
hundred and seven billion in quote seized Russian assets to
help fund the war efforts. So all of a sudden
(19:10):
they're now saying, well, we got two hundred billion or
two hundred and seven billion in US dollars two hundred
billion euros of seize Russian assets. Maybe we should use
that money instead of our own money to help them
in Ukraine. And I'm like, wow, you turn off this
picket in America, a brilliant, simple plan, and all of
a sudden they find two hundred billion euros sitting around
(19:31):
They're like, Okay, maybe we can give that.
Speaker 1 (19:32):
To them now. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (19:34):
Look, I'm all for the Europeans stepping in and doing
everything they can if they want to do that, knock
yourself out. They're welcome to spend their money, but we're
not the welfare provider for the world. And to be clear,
why are we borrowing when we got thirty six trillion
dollars in debt? Why are we borrowing money from China
to give it to other countries. That makes no sense,
(19:58):
and it is an interesting shift.
Speaker 1 (20:00):
Now.
Speaker 3 (20:00):
Look, I will say one of the frustrating things about
this meeting last week in the Oval is the meeting
was there to sign an agreement, an agreement that had
been negotiated ahead of time. And that agreement was an
agreement where Ukraine would give the United States a substantial
interest in its rare earth minerals and valuable resources to
(20:23):
pay back the one hundred and seventy five billion dollars
we've given them. That agreement made a lot of sense.
That agreement was pre negotiated. I think the White House
thought Zelensky was going to show up, sign the agreement
and leave. He didn't. Instead, he put on this performance.
And I actually want you to listen to this exchange
on CNN because it's a striking exchange. The first speaker
(20:47):
of Scott Jennings, who by the way. Scott Jennings is
doing a phenomenal job on CNN, being a voice of
reason and common sense fighting against a bunch of numb
nuts and left wing comedies. Really doing an effective job.
And he's in this case talking with Josh Rogan. Josh
Rogan is is a very smart reporter for Washington Post Intelligence.
(21:12):
He does foreign policy. But look, Josh Rogan and Scott
Jennings do not often agree. Listen to this back and
forth as they're analyzing what happened with Zelensky in the
Oval office.
Speaker 4 (21:25):
I don't know if he needs an apology. He needs
Zelensky to recognize the position that he's in. We're see
you as what We're their patron, we're their best hope
for the killing to stop and for them to emerge
from this sovereign and prosperous. And we're also their best
hope as a business partner. I mean, all Zelensky had
to do today was put on a tie, show up, smile,
(21:46):
say thank you, sign the papers, and have lunch.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
That's it.
Speaker 4 (21:51):
And he couldn't do that. And this followed ten days
of being difficult in private and now one day of
being stupid and public. I want this did not have
to go down this way. And however you feel about
why it started, why it's going on, who's right and
who's wrong. We can help them in this and come
out okay on the other side. And he's making it
(22:12):
hard now. First of all, I can't believe I'm about
to say this, but I actually agree with Scott and
everything that he said was basically right.
Speaker 1 (22:19):
Wow.
Speaker 4 (22:20):
I know I'm going to get killed on social media
for admitting that, but so be. I have a short
answer on this, and so the short answer is the
Trump administration believes that if Ukraine goes into business with
the United States, that in and of itself is a
security guarantee. If if your interests become our interests, we're
(22:40):
going to be interested in making sure our interests are secure.
So it would have been wise for him to understand
the economic deal, the mineral deal is a security guarantee
in and of itself, and he lost sight of that
today in the arguments premedity.
Speaker 1 (22:53):
I don't know.
Speaker 4 (22:54):
I think Zelenski misplayed it in the room, and you
can and we could disagree about Jade Vance's position on
it or agree on it. But either way, Zolensky certainly
had been briefed on what the right way to handle
this was, and all he had to do was walk
in there and say, thank you, I'm really grateful to
be here. We want to be partners with the United States.
(23:14):
We're grateful for your leadership. Where's the papers? And what
are we having for lunch? That's all he had to do.
And look, the posturing doesn't have to occur now. If
he is serious about wanting peace and ending this war,
you don't have to keep posturing as a tough guy.
Everybody knows you're tough, all right. The Ukrainians are tough,
they're brave, they're fighting a much larger country. Everybody knows.
(23:35):
The question for Zelensky is can you take off the
military uniform and put on the uniform of diplomacy. He
failed to test it.
Speaker 2 (23:42):
He failed diplomacy that test today. It was not a
hard meeting. This wasn't something that was gonna It was
harder to screw it up than it was to get
it right.
Speaker 3 (23:52):
Look, he needed mostly to be saying sir, yes, sir,
thank you, sir.
Speaker 1 (23:57):
May I have another.
Speaker 3 (24:00):
It? And Scott is right. Look, this deal on minerals
had the advantage for Ukraine of having the Trump administration
being an integally involved economic partner with Ukraine, that's really beneficial.
And the alternative is very different, which is without the
(24:24):
United States, Ukraine's prospects are really dim. And so if
you know that your prospects for success are miserably sad
unless President Trump supports you, in what universe do you
come in and start attacking and insulting him?
Speaker 1 (24:44):
Yeah, it doesn't.
Speaker 2 (24:46):
And this is now how fast can Europe get this
back together? But I do love they found billions and
billions and billions of Russian assets, Like, oh well, maybe
instead of our taxpayers over in Europe paying them giving them,
maybe we just take this money we can we've seized
and frozen, and then we'll use that in the war effort.
That makes more sense for the short term. So we're
(25:09):
going to go down that road. It's amazing how fast
Europe found cash when America said it no more from us,
We're not going to be suckers, Which brings me to
tomorrow night. Let's just have a little fun with this
for a second. Because you mentioned earlier to State of
the Union, others are going to say, well, technically, it's
a joint session of Congress. Can we explain very quickly
(25:31):
why the first time the president addresses a joint session
of Congress it's not technically called to state the Union,
but afterwards it is okay.
Speaker 3 (25:39):
So I believe tomorrow's address is a state of the Union.
You're right, but I think the sort of tradition is wrong.
The origin of the state of the Union comes from
the text of the Constitution. Article two, Section three provides, quote,
he the President shall from time to time give to
the Congress information of the state of the Union, and
(26:00):
recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge
necessary and expedient. And so that's the origin of it
that the Constitution says he shall give to Congress information
on the state of the Union. Now, traditionally, the first
address the president gives when he's newly elected is not
(26:22):
called a state of the Union address. It's rather just
called an address to a joint Session of Congress. And
traditionally the first state of the Union is the second
address he gives. So a year from now that will
be called a state of the Union. In my view,
the plain text of the Constitution is of the presidents
giving Congress his views on the state of the Union.
It's a State of the Union address, and so I
(26:44):
think the tradition is wrong. Now it's interesting if you
go and look at the history of it. Initially it
started in writing, so George Washington set written messages to
Congress instead of delivering them in person. So did John
Adams to Thomas Jefferson. So it started out that the
State of the Union was delivered in writing. Then Woodrow
(27:05):
Wilson in nineteen thirteen delivered his message in person, and
Franklin Roosevelt did the same. The first radio broadcast of
the State of the Union was in nineteen twenty three,
and the first televised advised address was in nineteen forty seven.
And it wasn't until nineteen sixty five, which is not
really that long ago, that President Johnson began delivering the
(27:29):
address in primetime, and then in nineteen sixty six the
opposition party began offering a televised response to the president's speech.
So today we think of it as a national speech
that's covered on TV on every one of the stations.
It didn't start out that way, but tomorrow we're going
to see exactly that, a national speech given to the country,
(27:51):
given to a Joint Session of Congress. I'll be sitting
there on the floor of the House listening to it,
and as will millions of people across America and all
across the world.
Speaker 1 (28:02):
What do you expect in this speech?
Speaker 2 (28:04):
I mean, this is going to be one where I
think it's going to be a lot about A we
one B this is what we're getting done for the
American people. I think the present understands how important this
speech is to continue momentum moving forward for DOGE and
other things. But I actually think this is one of
the most important speeches he's going to give because this
is at that critical moment where it's like, all right,
(28:27):
you know, are we winning. Yes, here's what we're doing,
Here's what we promised we were going to do, and
keep supporting and backing us because we're all in.
Speaker 3 (28:36):
So my prediction is the theme of the speech will
be promises made, promises kept, and it will have many
similar themes that the inauguration speech had about the mandate
from the last election. But the difference is going to
be the inauguration speech was on the first day of
the second term, so at that point nothing had happened yet.
(28:57):
It was literally raising his hand and taking the oath
of office is what made him president. So we hadn't
been able to do anything yet this second term when
he gave that speech. In this instance, we have seen
the most consequential first forty days of a president in history.
There's never been a president hit the ground running the
way Donald Trump has. There's never been a president issue
(29:19):
as many executive orders do as much as Donald Trump is,
and so I expect the speech to be number one.
I expect a lot of focus on the border. So
on the border, I think the President is going to say,
we had chaos, we had open borders, we had twelve
million illegal immigrants, we had the worst illegal immigration in
the history of our country. We had an invasion at
(29:39):
our southern border. The American people said enough is enough
is enough. I expect the President to point to in
the gallery victims of illegal immigration. I expect to see
the families of people who were murdered by illegal immigrants,
whether lacoln Riley or Joscelyn Nungary or Rachel Morin. I
(30:01):
expect to see the families, uh to highlight this was
a tragedy, it was wrong, and Americans were suffering every
damn day as I put it at at the RNC
convention this year, and we've seen in just forty days
the number of illegal crossings plummet over ninety percent. I
(30:22):
fully expect President Trump to say, you elected me to
fix this problem, and we are fixing the problem. If
you're a murderer, if you're a rapist, if you're a
child molester, if you're a Venezuelan gang member, get the
hell out because if you do it, don't We're going
to find you. We're going to arrest you, We're going
to deport you. We will secure the border. And that's
(30:43):
a promise made and a promise kept. I think that's
going to be a major major theme.
Speaker 2 (30:47):
I think entertant on enter how important do you think
this is? I mean, is this one of those where
your ik if you're able to.
Speaker 3 (30:55):
Look, I think it's important. I don't think it is,
you know, game changing either way. I think the President
will do a good job. I got to say State
of the Unions are always interesting, and we'll talk about
on Wednesday's pod.
Speaker 1 (31:08):
We'll talk about how.
Speaker 3 (31:10):
It was, and so you and I will record this
after the State of the Union. That's going to be
a brutal one. By the way, because the State of
the Union goes on forever. And then I typically do
various media. I don't know if I'm doing Hannity. I
often do Hannity after State of the Unions. But I'll
do some media and then you and I will record
the pod at midnight or one in the morning. So
(31:30):
but we will record it and I will give you
my real time assessments of how it went. But look,
I think the President is going to do a terrific
job with it. And I don't know that it matters.
I don't know that it will change anything fundamentally other
than I think a lot of people. You will have
tens of millions of people watching, and you will have
even more globally watching. And I think the basic message
(31:53):
the American people voted, they elected us, they gave us
a mandate, and we are on that mandate. We are
producing results, We're doing what the voters sent us here
to do. I think that message is really important, and
I think that message will be conveyed. I'm glad of that.
(32:15):
I think that's really important. By the way, I'll say
one of the things that I'm looking forward to so
later today I'm going to do an event in the
Capitol with the First Lady with Melania Trump. I'm going
to do an event with the First Lady on my
legislation to take it down. Legislation to take it down.
Legislation protects young girls, protects women from so called revenge porn,
(32:42):
protects them from deep fakes. So we've seen multiple instances.
We've seen teenage girls who won from Texas. Elliston Berry,
who was a freshman in high school, and she woke
up one morning and a classmate of hers, a boy
in ninth grade, had taken a perfectly innocuous picture of
(33:03):
her from social media, had used AI to create a
deep fake to make it look like they were naked
pictures of her. They were not real. They were fake,
but if you looked at them, you thought they were real.
The AI technology is such that you can't tell. And
this boider class had sent it to her classmates, and
this poor girl woke up in tears. If you can
imagine you and I are both parents, it's hard to
(33:25):
be a teenager anytime, but for a young girl to
have all your classmates think they're looking at naked pictures
of you, or in some instances, you have deep fake
videos where they can create pornographic videos of real people
that look like they're engaged in lude and explicit acts.
And my legislation that Take It Down Act makes it
(33:47):
number one a crime to post non consensual intimate images
and number two, whether real or deep fakes made using AI.
And number two it puts an obligation on social media
place platforms, and tech platforms to take this garbage down
when the victims notified them. In Elliston's situation, I met
with her. She reached out to me as her senator
(34:10):
and raised this And it's actually how I encountered the
issue because it was it was it was a concern
raised by a constituent, and I drafted this legislation in
response to her concerns. I met with her and her mom.
At the time, the pictures had been up on Snapchat
for nine months, and I asked her and her mom.
I said, well, what's the story with the pictures now?
And her mom said they're still up and they said.
(34:34):
Her mom said, I've called Snapchat, I've emailed them, I've
gone round and round and round. They will not take
them down. And I turned to my team, I said,
damn it, I want you to get the CEO of
Snapchat on the phone right now this afternoon, and I said,
those pictures will be down today.
Speaker 1 (34:53):
Ben.
Speaker 3 (34:53):
They pulled the pictures down within two hours. And you
know what, it should not take a sitting United States
Senator to make a phone call to make that happen.
The victim ought to have the right to get that down.
And so my legislation puts a legal obligation on the
part of the tech platform if the victim notifies them,
they have to take it down. So tomorrow I'm going
to do an event at the Capitol with the First
(35:14):
Lady of Milania Trump. We're gonna have Elliston, Barry Is there,
We're gonna have other victims who have been victims there
to highlight this legislation. My bill has already passed the
Senate one hundred and nothing. I believe we'll get it
through the House, and I think you could see the
President talking about issues like that at the State of
the Union as well, laying out we have a mandate
we're going to deliver and here's what we're delivering already.
Speaker 1 (35:36):
That's awesome.
Speaker 2 (35:38):
Well, we're going to have a big show after the
joint Address State of the Union, on, so get ready
for that. Make sure you get that subscriber auto download
button wherever you get this podcast, and please share it
on social media if you would rune us a five
star review. We'd also greatly appreciate that it helps us
reach a new audience every time you do that, So
(35:58):
if you'll do that as well, that would be huge,
And the Senator I will see you back here on
Wednesday morning.
Host
Ben Ferguson
Popular Podcasts
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
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.