August 21, 2025 • 52 mins
Zig's best summer ever ends, the Trump / Putin Rorschach test, Marco vs Margaret, mail-in ballots, Newsom makes his move toward the 28' nomination and a 28 team NCAA playoff.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-death-of-journalism--5691723/support.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-death-of-journalism--5691723/support.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to episode two hundred and fifty five The Death
of Journalism Podcast. My name is John Zigler. I'm your
host on today's show. The Trump Putin Summit is essentially
a rorshack test for how you view Trump. Putin provokes
Trump to go to war against mail in balloting. Gavin
Newsom decides he is the new Trump. The Taylor Swift
(00:21):
interview on the Kelsey Podcast is historic, and the destruction
of sports as we know it seems to be accelerating.
We begin this episode of the podcast with a personal note.
This is the official end of summer today in the
Zigler household because it was the first day of school.
(00:43):
As you probably know, my wife is a public school
teacher and this year one of her students will be
our seventh grade daughter, Grace, and also we have a
third grade daughter, Diana, both of whom started school today
as well. This is a big day in any family,
but for us it's particularly significant for a number of reasons,
(01:04):
not just the fact that Grace will be a student
of her mom's officially this year for at least one class,
but also because we take summers very, very very seriously
in our family, mainly because my wife does understandably so.
She lives a very grinding existence as a special ed
(01:27):
public school teacher, and those two months or so that
she has offer for the summer are basically all she
looks forward to all year long, and our trip to
Yosemite and usually some secondary trip and just the ability
to be away from school. Summer is everything to my wife,
and obviously summer is huge to my daughters, and when
(01:51):
it ends, it ends hard. The entire environment, the weather
system of our family dramatically changes in the days leading
up to the first day of school. I have learned
long ago that basically the worst two periods of the
year are just after Christmas and just as summer vacation
(02:12):
is ending. I now have to space at least the
next nine months of my wife having to go through
the absurdities of liberal public school education, and of course
complaining about it on a daily basis, which is understandable,
but I now have to deal with that, and of
course she gets very upset at me because I'm staying
at home and she's going off to work, and it's
(02:35):
just a completely night and day existence between summertime and
school year. And you know, as you get older, I'm
fifty eight, and you start to realize that the time
is quickly escaping from your grasp, and you look at
the fact that you have two young kids, and you really,
(02:56):
when it comes down to it, if you think about
summers being real the focal point of the entire year,
with two young daughters with a five year age gap,
you really only have seven or eight prime summers, and
we're down to our last couple I mean, in other words,
where both kids are young and interested in someone of
(03:18):
the same things and they at least most of the
time get along, and this summer will be impossible to beat.
I mean, this will likely go down as our best
summer ever. We had all sorts of activities, the weather
was amazing, there were no logistical major logistical problems. No
one got hurt, no one was unhealthy. We did everything
(03:39):
we wanted, We had visits from the grandparents. Everything that
could possibly go well went well, and nothing went wrong.
And there's a very good chance that we're never going
to exceed that we may never even meet what happened
this particular summer. But there's a downside to that because
now it's over, and now we begin the school year,
(04:00):
and everything in the Zigler household is going to change
almost entirely for the worst. Although our little daughter, Diana,
third grader, is very much looking forward to school because
she's really good at it, she enjoys it, she makes
friends easily, so there's at least that positive aspect of it.
But it is now going to be a very new
(04:20):
era in the Zigler family now that school has started.
And I will say one more time, not what I
say matters at all, but I'm a big believer that
we are starting school way too early. I think we've
lost something in labor day no longer being relevant. I mean,
for all different sorts of reasons. I can go through them,
(04:41):
and probably will at some other point, but I think
we have lost a lot in our society, one simply
by the communal moment. I mean, everybody starts school at
a different time period now, so nobody has anything in common.
Everyone ends school at a different time period now. And
there are all sorts of aspects of what used to
be American life when labor day mattered and most of
(05:04):
the time you went to school after labor Day that
are no longer in existence. One of them, by the way,
is that this drives me crazy, and no one ever,
mentions that high school football is now essentially a summer
sport because you start it in the middle of August
and you end it unless you make the playoffs even
before Halloween, depending on the calendar. And that's just brog
(05:25):
in my opinion. But that's another story for another day.
So that's the situation with regard to the Zigler family. Obviously,
the big news story of the last week was the
summit in Alaska between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. I
will mention one more time because I did at the
end of last week's episode of the podcast that somewhere,
(05:46):
although I haven't seen it in the interviews with her
taking a victory lap, Sarah Palin has to feel some
sense of vindication after she was unfairly mocked in the
two thousand and eight election for making the factual statement
to Charlie Gibson ABC News that you can see parts
of Russia from land here in Alaska, and that of
(06:07):
course is true. It was mocked by Tina Fey on
Saturday Night Live, where she turned that into I can
see Russia from my house, which to this day, it's
extraordinary to me how many people seem to believe that
that's essentially what she said, and the media did a
horrendous job of sifting fact from fiction and letting people
(06:29):
know that, Yeah, oh, by the way, Russia and Alaska
are effectively the same land mass in some areas. In fact,
Alaska used to be part of Russia, and during certain
times of the year you can theoretically walk from Alaska
to Russia. And that's why they had the summit in Alaska.
And it was remarkable to me as someone who did
(06:51):
a documentary film about the two thousand and eight election.
It featured an exclusive interview with Sarah Palin. That was
one of the subjects that we dealt with. How many
people were suddenly now acknowledging gee, you know, Sarah Plen
was actually right about this, And even I was kind
of stunned by do you really not have any basic
knowledge of geography? It's not that difficult. I realized that
(07:15):
for most people it's not top of mind. But if
you you know, it takes two seconds to investigate it,
it's not a difficult concept. But that was one of
the more remarkable elements of the Trump Putin summit as
far as I was concerned, given the history of that
whole situation in my small role in it now, as
far as the summit itself, you know, I have been
(07:38):
critical of the way Trump has handled this whole Ukraine
Russia situation in the big picture. From a strategic standpoint,
I mean, we have to remember this is a guy
who on multiple occasions claimed that he could end this
war in one day. That's what he said. Expectations are
everything in life, and he created the expectation that this
(08:00):
would be a situation that would be easily ended, that
he and he alone could do it in one day.
And obviously, you know, we're at the end of August
now and we're nowhere near apparently an end to the
war between Russia and Ukraine. And my biggest criticism of
Trump from a strategic standpoint, I've been baffled by this
(08:22):
because negotiating is Trump's forte. I mean, he's the guy
who wrote the book The Art of the Deal, that's
what he's most well known for. It seems to me
as if it's been a major mistake to go to
Russia first, right, I mean, if you're going to do
this it strategically he is, he has said publicly in
(08:46):
that infamous meeting, was Elensky that Zelensky has no cards.
He's acknowledged publicly that Russia has the cards, Russia has
the leverage, and so to me, what happened in this
summit was a bit belated because because originally it seems
as if Trump's plan was go to Zelensky first, find
(09:06):
out what he will accept, and then go to Putin. Well,
that can't work because inherently, if Putin knows he has
the leverage, and you Trump have said publicly to the
world that he has the leverage, there ain't no way
in God's creation that he's going to accept any deal
that's close to what Zelensky says is okay, it's just
(09:30):
basic negotiating. If you know you have the leverage, what
the guy with no leverage once is a non starter.
You have to go to the person with leverage and
figure out what will they accept, what's the bare minimum
they will accept, and then you go back to Zelensky
and say, Okay, do you want to eat the shit
(09:50):
sandwich or not? Do you want the war to end
or not? Well, it seems as if that that was
at least an improvement, you know, going literally halfway. I
guess you would call it to Putin to meet him
in Alaska to find out, Okay, what will it take
to end this situation? However, and I said it in
(10:11):
the intro, this whole situation really is a rorshack test
for how you've view Trump if you don't like Trump.
There was a lot, a lot to be very cynical
about and very critical about when it came to this
entire summit. The idea that Trump literally rolled out the
(10:33):
red carpet that he was applauding Putin. You know, he
had to be to bomber flyover, I mean basically treating
Putin like a conquering hero. And we all know the
history of this situation, where it's been very obvious that
Trump has at least some admiration for Putin. Now he's
made some more critical comments more recently indicating that Putin
(10:57):
keeps fooling him and isn't to be trusted. And yet
it seems as if Trump was more than willing to
trust Putin, at least on the things that he liked
that Putin said. Many of them had absolutely nothing to
do with the situation regarding the war with Ukraine. So
I did not like the tone that was created by
(11:19):
Trump but as someone who's always been very fair, maybe
more fair than he deserves. The Trump, I'm willing because
he has been able to pull the rabbit out of
the hat in the past. I'm at least willing to
give him some latitude, give him some space here. Maybe
(11:39):
his craziness will actually work here. So I'm not making
any conclusions about how this is all going to end.
I'm just saying this is not the way I would
do it, not the way it would make sense to
do it, and I don't think it's right to treat
putin this way. And it didn't appear, and I want
to underline appear as if it worked, at least in
(12:00):
the short run, because, based upon the conventional way of
looking at these summits, this had all the signs of
at least a borderline disaster and maybe a total disaster.
The way these things work is ta leaves matter. Very
(12:23):
seemingly small gestures are understandably extrapolated to interpret what actually transpired. Now,
maybe Trump has so changed the world that that matrix
is no longer relevant, that prism through which we see
events no longer really matters. I'm open to that possibility. However,
(12:46):
you cannot deny that there were several very concerning elements
of this whole situation. I mean, first of all, the
lunch got canceled. Second of all, there was no real
press conference. There were no questions asked of Putin or
Trump at this quote unquote press event. Maybe most concerningly,
(13:08):
that event was totally dominated by Vladimir Putin. I mean,
it is astonishing that an American president, on American soil,
took part in a press event that was begun by
Vladimir Putin and dominated by Vladimir Putin dominated. Now, is
(13:33):
it possible that Trump agreed to that. It's hard for
me to believe that he did, but it certainly did
seem appear. It is easily to perceive that Putin had
the upper hand in this whole situation. And that's certainly
consistent with what we know of the history of this situation,
specifically the relationship between Putin and Trump. My gosh, Trump's
(13:58):
own words have been that Putin keeps lying to him
and that Trump's sick and damn tired of it, and
continuing with this narrative that Putin really manipulated Trump and
got the better of him. Putin apparently on two separate occasions,
one publicly and one privately, whispered sweet nothings into Trump's
(14:22):
ear about two subjects that anybody with any knowledge of
Trump would know would be an area where it was
incredibly easy for Trump to be manipulated. His weak spots.
I mean, everybody knows that Trump has a weak spot
in his ego, and everybody knows that Trump has a
(14:43):
weak spot when it comes to previous elections, specifically the
twenty twenty election being rigged against him, and Putin, very
smartly from a manipulation perspective, said publicly that if Trump
had been pro resident, something that Trump has said many
times previously, that if Trump had been president and had
(15:05):
won the twenty twenty election, that there would be no
war between Russia and Ukraine. Now, I have absolutely no
idea if that's true or not. It could be true,
it could be false, it could be Playton propaganda and
overt manipulation. But that's what Putin said publicly, and of
(15:26):
course that's gonna butter up Trump. I mean that is
I mean, my gosh, that is as obvious an act
of attempted manipulation as you could possibly imagine, and it
seemingly worked. On Trump, and I always find it amazing.
I mean, Maggot World baffles me in so many ways,
(15:48):
but the inconsistency of their analysis of people and concepts
and world events is just mind blowing. But I've even
publicly asked for a chart, a Maga chart for when
Putin is telling the truth and when he's absolutely not
to be trusted. Could somebody please show me that, because
(16:11):
when Putin said that if Trump had been president, there
never would have been a war, Maga World completely accepted
that as one hundred percent true. I have no idea
if it's true, But I also know that Putin has
a massive self interest to lie about that because he
knows that Trump is going to lap that up. It's
(16:33):
going to stroke Trump's ego, It's going to make Trump
vulnerable to Putin's manipulation. And it seems as if it worked,
because it wasn't just what would have happened had Trump
won the twenty twenty election. According to Trump, Putin actually
(16:55):
told Trump he did win the twenty twenty election because
of voter fraud and specifically mail in ballots. Now, I
have no idea how much expertise Putin has when it
comes to American mail in ballots. But this was an
absolutely extraordinary moment on Fox News Channel in an interview
(17:19):
that Donald Trump did with Sean Hannity. And I think
this is a great example of how desensitized we have
become by the entire Trump era. I mean, this is
one of those situations that you know, certainly ten years
ago would have been absolutely so bonkers that it's all
(17:39):
anybody would be talking about. And frankly, I don't think
this got nearly as much attention as it probably deserved,
largely because of the desensitization. But here is the President
of the United States telling Sean Hannity the Vladimir Putin
during a summit about the Ukraine War, where this subject
(18:04):
really should have no relevance whatsoever, that Donald Trump actually
won the twenty twenty election because of mail in ballots
not being credible and or secure. And here's what that
sounded like on Fox News Channel.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
Oh, Vladimir Putin said something one of the most interesting things.
He said, your election was rigged because you have mail
in voting. He said, mail in voting every election. He said,
no country has mail in voting. It's impossible to have
mail in voting, and have honest elections. And he said
that to me, it was very truck because we talked
(18:43):
about twenty twenty. He said, you won that election by
so much, and that's how he got it, he said,
And if you.
Speaker 1 (18:47):
Would have won, we wouldn't have had a war.
Speaker 2 (18:49):
You'd have all these millions of people alive now instead
of dead. And he said, and you lost it because
of mail in voting.
Speaker 3 (18:56):
It was a rigged election.
Speaker 2 (18:57):
But male in voting, Sean.
Speaker 1 (19:00):
Now, to be clear, I hate mail in balloting. We
have universal mail in balloting here in California, and I
think it is a complete joke. I think it is
ripe for voter fraud. Not in the ways that Maga
world thinks, but in my opinion. You know, it's obvious
(19:22):
that that younger relatives vote for elderly relatives. It's incredibly
easy for that to happen. Spouses vote for spouses in
ways that I might not be consistent with their true intent.
I have concerns about nursing homes and how ballots are
(19:42):
are treated there, and whether or not that could be
an area where a lot of people are voting for
somebody else. I realize that a lot of people are
very concerned about ballot harvesting, and I do think that's
a valid concern. But I bottom line is I hate
mail in, especially universe mail in balloting. And so it's
(20:03):
not as if on the issue I disagree with Trump
or I guess Putin. But the idea that Trump is
even focused on this during a summit where he's trying
to come to a peace deal on a war, and
where he doesn't even appear to understand that Putin is
(20:23):
obviously and clearly manipulating him, whether he's telling the truth
or not, is just beyond extraordinary. And it's a further indication,
using the rorshack test analogy, that if you have a
negative or cynical view of Trump, there's a lot of
(20:44):
information here, a lot of data points that makes you go,
wait a minute, this did not go well at all?
Did Trump get rolled? And one of those data points
was an extraordinary report on Fox News Chat by a
reporter by the name of Jackie Henrich, who was there
(21:04):
in the room. Now she's on Fox News Channel, effectively
state run television. Although Magoworld turns on Fox News Channel
at every moment that they don't it's about nothing but
positive talking points about Donald Trump. But here was a
section of Heinrich report from the room where the press
(21:27):
conference between Putin or press event between Putin and Trump
took place, that went viral and provoked an enormous amount
of backlash from Magaworld online. Here was Fox News Channel
reporting that, you know, it didn't feel like things went
(21:47):
nearly as well for Trump as we had hoped or expected.
And here's what it sounded like on Fox News Channel.
Speaker 4 (21:55):
Happened back there.
Speaker 5 (21:56):
It was just very unusual, atypical, and I think we're
all awaiting the readout because the way that it felt
in the room was not good. It did not seem
like things went well, and it seemed like Putin came
in and steamrolled, got right into what he wanted to say,
and got his photo next to the president and then left.
(22:18):
Of course, that is only the piece of the picture
that we have right now, and certainly President Trump, who
is the host and who is the president, would not
want to, I think, enable something that would make him
look weak. But we are eagerly awaiting to hear the
background on that. And I will also note that we
didn't see any sort of scowls on the faces of
(22:39):
the likes of Steve Witcoff or Secretary Rubio or any
of the other members of the US delegation. And I
think had it been concerning, we might have seen something there.
But just just to paint a picture for you of
in the room, how it felt, what we're wondering about,
what we need to know to put the pieces together
and fully understand, but we all just witnessed.
Speaker 1 (22:59):
Now, when I saw that, I was like, oh my gosh,
she is going to get an enormous amount of backlash.
I believed what she was saying, or I believe that
she thought that that was the truth of the matter,
based upon her first hand observations. By the way, there
were other reporters who had similar observations about what was
(23:20):
going on, but of course they don't work for Fox NewsChannel.
The fact that this was a Fox News Channel report
was why it was considered to be so significant, why
it went viral, and why it created so much backlash,
and so much backlash that later on the reporter was
(23:41):
told by an anchor, well, you know, Trump is telling
people privately that the meeting went as a ten out
of ten or something to that effect, and she basically
backed down. Oh good, glad to hear it like, I
mean that that's not journalism. First of all, what Trump
says privately trying to put lipstick on a potential pig
(24:03):
is not very credible. Now I realize Trump is always
gonna declare victory. That's the one of the core tenets
of Trump's entire modus operaan day. Always, always, always declare victory.
Everything is always awesome. And so to me, that doesn't
have a lot of weight, especially when it's done on
(24:25):
background to a Fox News Channel reporter or anchor, and
then that gets used as a way to try to
force the reporter on the scene to back down from
their observations which were not at all positive. Again, I
want to emphasize, is it possible that you know, Trump
has a greater plan here, or that Trump's craziness is
(24:46):
actually gonna work in the end? Yeah, I think that's possible.
I don't know if it will. I don't know if
it won't. But on the surface, based upon the facts
we have and based upon basic observations and basic common sense,
I don't think this went well, and I don't think
this situation is likely to end in a very good
(25:09):
deal or any deal at all, necessarily, and My opinion
on that was further solidified by Secretary of State Marc
or Rubio, who I like, who I supported in the
twenty sixteen presidential election against Donald Trump, and who normally
is really really good on these Sunday morning television shows.
(25:32):
He went on I think three of them, maybe more
than that on Sunday to try to spin what happened
with regard to the Trump Putin summit, and frankly, I
didn't think Rubio fared that well. It may not have
been his fault because he didn't have a very good
fact pattern with which to work, but you know, I
thought it was particularly interesting that when he went and
(25:53):
faced the nation with Margaret Brennan, and Margaret Brennan has been,
you know, getting her ass kicked by Rue and other
members of the Trump administration throughout this entire year, so
I felt this was particularly significant that even Margaret Brennan
seemed to get the better of Mark or Rubio when
it came to just the basics of what appears to
(26:17):
be shaping up as a potential deal that is very
very much in the favor of Putin and Russia. I
talked about how this problem, this inherent negotiating problem where
one side, where even Trump is acknowledged, one side has
the leverage, one side has the cards. Well, you have
(26:38):
to go to them first, and you have to hope
that they're at least somewhat reasonable so that you can
go to the side without the leverage in this case
Ukraine and Zelensky and say will you accept most or
all of this so that we can get a piece deal. Well,
Putin seems to be overplaying his hand, which is consistent
(26:58):
with his history, and who could blame him when Trump
himself told the whole world that Zelenski doesn't have any cards.
So Putin appears to be asking for the world effectively
and putting the United States and Ukraine in a seemingly
almost impossible situation because in order to get a deal,
(27:22):
they're going to have to capitulate to Putin in Russia
in an extraordinary fashion, even giving Putin land that he
didn't even quote unquote win in the war. And here's
what it sounded like on CBS when Margaret Brennan interviewed
and asked pretty pointed questions of Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Speaker 4 (27:43):
Ultimately, if Vladimir Putin is going to be offered land
that he has not seized yet but negotiates his way into.
Doesn't this set a dangerous precedent that the United States
now accepts this concept that it is okay to seize
land by force.
Speaker 6 (28:04):
Well, Putin's already sees land by force, and that in
and of itself is not a positive precedent this.
Speaker 1 (28:09):
Whole war demand withdrawal for precedent.
Speaker 6 (28:12):
Well, again, here's the In order to have a deal
here to in to reach the end of this conflict,
both sides are going to have to make concessions. That's
just a fact any negotiation. No, no, But but this is
not about accepting. This is about what Ukraine can accept
and what Russia can accept. They both have to accept it,
otherwise there won't be a peace deal. Okay, if there
aren't concessions, if one side gets everything they want, that's
(28:35):
called surrender. That's called the end of the war through surrender.
And that's not what we're close to doing, because neither
side here is on the verge of surrender anything close
to it. So in order for there to be a
peace deal, this is just a fact. We may not
like it, it may not be pleasant, it may be distasteful,
but in order for there to be an end of
the war, there are things Russia wants that it cannot
get and there are things Ukraine wants that it's not
going to get. Both sides are going to have to
(28:57):
give up something in order to get to the table
in order to make this happen. That's just the way
it is. And I mean, the sooner we accept that
that's the reality. Now what those things are, it's going
to be up to both sides. There's no conditions that
can be imposed on Ukraine. They're going to have to
accept things, but they're gonna have to get things too.
And so, for example, Ukraine is a sovereign country. They
have a right like every sovereign country does in the world,
(29:19):
to have the enter into security alliances with other countries
to prevent an invasion in the future, to prevent threats
to the national security. That's not an unreasonable request. That's
something needs to be worked on. Territories will have to
be discussed. It's just a fact. And there are things
that maybe Russia's holding now that they're going to have
to give up, who knows. The point is, we need
to create a scenario where that becomes possible. And that's
(29:40):
why this has been so hard, because neither side up
to now has been willing to give on some of
these things.
Speaker 1 (29:46):
But we'll see if that's possible.
Speaker 6 (29:48):
It may not be, but we're gonna try, and we're
gonna do everything we can to try to achieve a peace.
Speaker 1 (29:52):
So to me, Rubio and his answers there are not
particularly compelling or convincing or confidence inducing that there can
be a deal here where Putin doesn't dramatically benefit from
having invaded Ukraine. And that's a problem. And to the
(30:14):
larger point of okay, you know, you go to Putin first,
you find out what he will accept, then you go
to Zelenski. Well, Zelenski came to the White House, to Washington,
d C. It's important to point out he didn't come alone.
Many European leaders came with him because I think they
were terrified of the idea that Donald Trump was essentially
the lone mediator in this situation. And and look, I
(30:37):
mean I don't like Zelinsky at all. I mean I
don't like Zelensky hardly anymore than I like Putin. I
mean I like him maybe a little bit more, but
not by much so I don't like anybody here. I've
said this many times. I don't have a dog in
this hut. I don't trust any of the of the
main actors here. I'm not sure this situation is directly
in our in our own uh you know, spear of interest.
(31:01):
I mean it's important I acknowledge that, and maybe nobody
else can negotiate an end to this because of our
unique role. But to me, this has not been the
most important issue. I'm much more of a domestic guy.
But the bottom line of this is that if you
have I don't like it. I don't like Zelensky, but
you've got to have Zelensky on board, and so you
(31:23):
bring him. And if you're Zelensky, you got to be
a bit concerned that Donald Trump is the guy who
has your fate in his hands. And I think European
leaders were very concerned about that, and they came to Washington,
d C. With him in a show of support. And
you know, that meeting with Trump seemed to go a
(31:45):
lot better. Certainly couldn't have gotten much worse than the
infamous meeting earlier this year where Trump declared to the
world that Zelensky doesn't have the cards and that Putin
has all the leverage, which I think we're still paying
for as of this moment. But there were a couple
of very strange moments in that meeting that I think
(32:07):
just show how effective Putin's manipulation of Trump was, as
well as how easily Trump is distracted, because there were
two situations that occurred during the public meeting with Zelenski
in front of the press at the White House, where
(32:29):
Trump ended up talking about American elections and at least
hopefully trolling or joking even about the twenty twenty six
or twenty twenty eight elections being canceled, which of course,
(32:50):
you know, drives people crazy because that's the fear that
Trump's going to run for a third term or we're
not going to have democracy and he'll be able to
stay in office into perpetuity until he does, and he's
a monarch, and all of which you know, I find concerning,
but I also acknowledge is mostly a joke. But I
do think that there are certain times and places and
(33:11):
subjects about which you don't joke, and this is clearly
one of them. And so there are two clips from
this Zelenski meeting where Trump gets totally sidetracked on election issues. Again,
it's important to point out Putin put him down this
path because Putin has now further convinced him that he
won the twenty twenty election, which he did not. And
(33:34):
you know, Trump uses the opportunity of Zelenski being there.
And it's important to point out Ukraine did cancel an
election because they were in the middle of a war
with Russia, which I do think is a unique situation.
I'm not supporting it, I'm not defending it, but we
aren't Ukraine either. I see a lot of people online saying, well,
(33:54):
if they did it, you know, why can't we do it.
Trump's just showing the hypocrisy of the situation. No, we're
the United States of America. We're held to a different standard,
at least should be than Ukraine. And so here's the
first of these two clips from the Zelensky meeting, where
Trump uses Zelensky to try to show that, you know,
(34:15):
if he really wanted to, I guess he could cancel
the election. Of course, his fans think he's joking and
trolling the left, which I would like to believe is
in fact the case. But I still believe it's highly inappropriate.
And here's what that sounded like at the White House.
Speaker 3 (34:32):
Legal elections, So you shay during it. During the war,
you can't have elections. So let me just say three
and a half years from now.
Speaker 2 (34:41):
So you mean, if we happen to be in a
war with somebody, no more elections.
Speaker 3 (34:46):
So I wonder what the fake I got a question
for you? This legal elections?
Speaker 2 (34:56):
So you shay during it. During the war, you can't
have election. So let me just say three and a
half years from now. So you mean, if we happen
to be in.
Speaker 3 (35:05):
A war with somebody, no more elections. So I wonder
what the fai? I got a question for you? This
sounds the fate.
Speaker 1 (35:18):
Now, that's just inappropriate. That's wrong. You know, to use
an incredibly significant meeting with a foreign leader where you're
trying to broke your peace with Russia and you're in
front of the world press to even joke about the
fact that you might cancel our presidential elections is totally wrong.
(35:40):
And I get that Trump was very likely joking, But
that's the way that a fire wall, see there needs
to be. If we used to believe in firewalls, we
used to believe that the slippery slope was a very
dangerous concept. We've forgotten that for some reason. But there
needs to be firewalls to protect the core. And obviously
(36:04):
the core of the United States of America is that
we have free and democratic elections, and we have a
presidential election every four years, come hell or high water, right.
And the way that that firewar wall gets diminished is
by joking about it and having the President of the
United States joke about it and desensitize people to the
(36:27):
absurdity of the concept. And yes, I'm willing to acknowledge
this was a joke, this was a troll, but it
has significance. It has significance in the long run, if
only by the way, this is probably the best case scenario.
Let's say Trump has absolutely positively no interest in serving
past twenty twenty eight, which is the most likely scenario, right,
(36:50):
But the next time someone jokes about this or makes
an allusion to this kind of thing, they can rely
on the idea, well, Trump did it, Why can't I
do it. I'm just joking, and maybe they won't be joking.
My point is that over time we get desensitized that
(37:11):
the slippery slope matters, and that you must maintain a
firewall to prevent these kind of things from ever coming
close to happening, and that means you don't joke about it.
As the president of the United States, especially in such
a highly charged and highly public situation. This was totally
(37:34):
wrong for Trump to do this, even if it was
a joke, even if it was a troll that his
fans love, because they know it drives the liberal media crazy.
You know what, the liberal media absolutely should go crazy
in a situation like this, And if a Democratic president
ever did this, the right wing media would be going bananas.
(37:57):
But of course they don't in this situation, because Trump
has all ready set the predicate that he's a jokester,
he's a troll artist. And I'm sorry, even if that's
the case, which I'm willing to acknowledge, is the farley.
The farley by far the most likely scenario. That is
still a dangerous situation. You're still starting us down the
(38:22):
slippery slope because at a certain point, the line between
joking and you're not sure if someone's joking, oh my god,
they're serious, and oh my gosh. Much of the public
has been desensitized to this entire issue, and now maybe
they can get away with it is not that far fetched.
(38:43):
And for Trump to do it basically just to tickle
his base and to tickle his own fancy and to
give himself a thrill because he's trolling his enemies is wrong.
It's selfish, it's wrong, it's stupid, and it's dangerous. But
that wasn't the only time during this meeting with Zelenski
that Trump decided that American elections, and very specifically issues
(39:10):
that make him feel better about himself, were worthy of
being discussed. And this is not a coincidence that, if
we believe Trump putin whispered this into his ear, that
all of a sudden, Trump is now fully at war
with the issue of mail in balloting. Before the Zelensky meeting,
(39:31):
he put out a social media post saying that he's
signing an executive order that's going to attempt to ban
mail in voting, which I don't have any idea how
in the world Trump thinks he has the authority to
do that. We do not have federal elections in this country.
We have state and local elections, and so I do
(39:53):
not know how in the world Trump thinks he has
the authority to do this. But it's not a coincid
science that putin whispers in his ear in Alaska. He
comes back and declares via social media plans for this
executive order, which I don't think is going to have
any real power, at least not in the Blue and
(40:15):
Purple States. Maybe in the Red States, but that wasn't
an issue to begin with, because the Red States are
the only ones that are really listening to most of
these executive orders. But here, in this very high profile,
very important meeting, Trump gets asked about the issue, largely
because he had just put out a social media post
about it, and he goes on a diatribe again, one
(40:38):
that in principle I agree with, although I think that
Trump focuses on the wrong elements that are problematic regarding
mail in balloting. But here was Donald Trump again at
the White House, going off on a diatribe about stopping
mail in voting, something that I don't believe he is
(40:59):
the authority to actually do.
Speaker 3 (41:01):
Pushed out on social media about doing away with mail
in ballots and potentially electronic voting machines. Can you expend
on that help port Well, that's a very off topic.
Speaker 7 (41:10):
Just really quickly, mail in ballots are corrupt mail in ballots.
You can never have a real democracy with mail in ballants,
and we as a Republican party, are going to do
everything possible that we get rid of mail in ballots.
We're going to start with an executive order that's being
written right now by the best lawyers in the country
(41:31):
to end mail in ballots because they're corrupt. And do
you know that we're the only country in the world
I believe I may be wrong, but just about the.
Speaker 3 (41:41):
Only country in the.
Speaker 7 (41:41):
World that uses them because of what's happened, massive fraud
all over the place.
Speaker 3 (41:46):
The other thing, we want change of the machines.
Speaker 8 (41:49):
For all of the money they spend, it's approximately ten
times more expensive than paper ballots, and paper ballots are
very sophisticated with the watermark paper and everything else.
Speaker 3 (42:00):
We would get secure.
Speaker 7 (42:01):
Elections, we'd get much faster results the machines. I mean
they say we're going to have the results in two weeks.
With paper ballots, you have the results that night. Most
people almost but most people many countries use paper ballots.
Speaker 3 (42:15):
It's the most secure form.
Speaker 7 (42:17):
So between paper ballots, very very important paper ballots and
I think maybe even more important the mail in voting.
Speaker 3 (42:25):
We're going to end mail in voting. It's a fraud
if you have mail.
Speaker 7 (42:30):
Even Jimmy Carter with this commission, they set it up,
he said.
Speaker 3 (42:33):
The one thing about mail in voting, you.
Speaker 7 (42:35):
Will never have an honor selection if you have mail
in it. And it's time that the Republicans get tough
and stop it because the Democrats want it. It's the
only way they can get elected because with men and
women's sports, and with transgender for everybody, and open borders and.
Speaker 3 (42:52):
All of the horrible things. And now the new thing
is they love crime.
Speaker 7 (42:56):
They're fighting me on the fact that I've made DC safe.
Speaker 3 (43:01):
We're not going to get mugged, beaten.
Speaker 7 (43:02):
Up or killed like all the people you've been watching
get so badly hurt.
Speaker 3 (43:07):
I'm glad.
Speaker 7 (43:08):
I hate to take your time with this, but I'm
glad you asked me that question, sir. We're going to
stop mail in ballots because it's corrupt. You know, when
you go to a voting booth and you do it
the right way, and you go to a state that
runs it properly, you go in. They even ask me.
They asked me for my license plate for identify. I said,
I don't know if I have it, he said, sir,
(43:29):
you have to have it. They're very impressed, actually, but
it's very hard to cheat with mail in voting. As
you know what happens in California. It's so corrupt where
some people get five, six, seven ballots delivered to them.
Speaker 3 (43:43):
Now, we got to stop mail in voting, and the
Republicans have to lead the charge.
Speaker 7 (43:47):
The Democrats want it because they have horrible policy. If
you have mail in voting, you're not going to have
many Democrats get elected again.
Speaker 1 (43:54):
I want to emphasize I hate mail in balloting as
much as a Trump does. I think maybe more so
because of the fact that we have it universally in
the state of California. But I don't believe that mail
in balloting is why Trump lost the twenty twenty election.
(44:17):
This is clearly why he cares so much about it,
because he thinks it's the path. By the way, whatever
happened to the dominion voting systems situation. We'll get to
more of that in a second, because there's a settlement
legally in that circumstance. But you know, the narrative has
changed pretty significantly on how Trump had the twenty twenty
(44:38):
elections stolen from him. It used to be rigged, Now
it's mail in balloting. Look, I think the twenty twenty
election should have an asterisk because of COVID. I mean,
I have been very very clear that COVID was used
as a weapon to destroy the economy and to fundamentally
(44:59):
alter the nature of that election. And yes, the way
that that election was actually conducted, and yes, that's why
Joe Biden got a record number of votes because we
had universal mail in balloting. And I have no doubt
that there was fraud. I don't think it was organized.
I don't think it was large enough to be the
(45:20):
difference between Trump winning and losing, because it really wasn't
all that close in twenty twenty. But I fully acknowledge
that the twenty twenty election was a farce, but it
was not stolen and it was not rigged. That being said,
I hate mail in balloting. I don't think Trump has
(45:41):
the authority to do what he's claiming he's going to do.
And I don't understand how this becomes a major issue
while you're trying to come up with a peace plan
between Russia and Ukraine, and even Trump seemingly felt badly
about raising the issue during that event, which shows you
just how bad it must be for Trump to even
(46:02):
feel guilty about it. You know that it's totally inappropriate
to be raising this issue at that time, but you
can't take away the context of the fact that, according
to Trump, it was Putin who whispered this in his
ear just a couple of days before. I mean, there's
a direct line. I'm sorry, folks, there's a direct line
(46:24):
between Putin saying that to Trump and Alaska and now
Trump going to war against mail in balloting. And by
the way, and you know, my opinion on the whole
Russia Gate situation is extremely nuanced. I'm not going to
go through it again. Yes, the media completely blew it.
Yes it was way overblown. Yes there was no direct collusion. However,
(46:47):
it's clear that Russia did attempt to help Trump, and
that Trump did some things he should never have done,
and he was trying to hide those things, and those
attempts to hide things got misinterpreted as him being some
sort of a Manchurian candidate. I mean, that's the short
version of what happened. The Steele dossier was wrong, but
(47:07):
I don't believe that there was some sort of massive
conspiracy to have a coup against Trump. So I have
basically my opinion on Russiagate is not shared by anybody,
and it doesn't please anybody. But the reality here is
it's not exactly a great argument that Russiagate in twenty
(47:31):
sixteen was completely bullshit and there was nothing to it.
When you are taking the word of Vladimir Putin that
the twenty twenty election was rigged against you, and then
using Putin's testimony to you to motivate you to fundamentally
(47:52):
alter the nature of our elections going forward, and oh,
by the way, joking that you might cancel the next
presidential election. I mean, I'm sorry, folks. I mean I'm
not saying that that means that there was more to it.
I'm just saying that that's that's not a real great
fact pattern. If that's your argument, and part of it's
(48:16):
Trump being Trump, I get it. I understand all that,
but I don't think that as of right now, there's
any signs that this has been effective and trying to
get a piece deal. I think it shows that he
is easily manipulated by Putin and that he is being
manipulated now. I mean, there was the situation during the
(48:37):
meeting with Zelensky where apparently Trump called Putin and decided
to talk to him alone, which I don't have a
huge problem with. I get as a as a mediator
that you want everyone to have privacy and you want
to be able to say things more freely without you know,
Zelensky hearing exactly how the sausage is being made. I
(48:58):
get all that, but it's also concerning and as far
as the bottom line deal, look, Trump has a huge advantage,
a huge advantage here politically when it comes to making
any sort of a piece deal, Trump can basically and
this would worry me if I was Lenski, Trump can
(49:18):
make almost any piece deal as long as the piece
maintains itself, and his base is going to praise the
hell out of it one because they don't care about
the details. They don't understand the details. They don't really
care if Putin gets things that he doesn't deserve, they
(49:39):
don't really care if Ukraine gets screwed in the situation.
They just want peace and the details don't matter. So
Trump has wide latitude in doing almost anything he wants
when it comes to a deal. Politically, he can sell
Ukraine out as much as he wants. Frankly, to me,
(50:01):
that's about the only way you're likely to get a
deal at this point. And I only talk about things
that I consider myself to be highly educated on, or
maybe some sort of an expert on or have a
great interest in, and the Ukraine Russia war has never
been one of them. But and so I'm not going
to claim that I have some great insight into what
(50:21):
this deal is going to look like. I'm just looking
at the big picture as to who has the leverage
and where Trump's loyalties and self interest lies. And I
don't think it bodes well for a good deal. I
do think that there could be a deal because Trump
is very much invested in trying to get a deal,
especially since it is perceived as this summit was not
(50:43):
a success. There was no cease fire agreement, and as
of this taping, there's no sign that we're closed to
a peace deal to end the Ukraine Iraq War. But obviously,
you know, I hope that there is a deal. I
hope it's a decent deal. I would love to see
this this story go away. I'd love to see there'd
be peace, people stop dying, and if Trump can do it,
(51:03):
I'll give him credit. I mean, hey, hell, Hillary Clinton
even said she would vote for him for the nominate
him for the Nobel Peace Prize if he gets this done.
My interpretation of that was that she doesn't think it's possible.
I think I'm probably more in her camp that it's
just not possible because of the circumstances surrounding the negotiation.
Of course, you know, MAGA World thinks that this is
(51:24):
an indication. It's no bag of World is so crazy,
but they think that this is an indication that Hillary
knows that she's legally vulnerable, so she's trying to kiss
Trump's ass. I mean, it's no matter what she does
or says, it doesn't matter. It's it's just amazing. I mean,
just every conspiracy theory possible, Magaworld falls for every single time,
(51:44):
and they're almost always debunked, and it doesn't matter to
them when they actually get debunked. Of have a few
more thoughts than that. In a second, Thanks for listening
to today's free drop of the abbreviated show. If you're
interested in listening to the entire show, you must become
a pay Please go to Patreon. That's p A t
R e O N dot com. Patreon dot com slash
(52:10):
The Death of Journalism with John Ziggler. My name is
j O H N z I E G L e R.
That's Patreon dot com slash The Death of Journalism with
John Ziggler. Good luck to you on that. But that's
how you can subscribe.
Welcome to episode two hundred and fifty five The Death
of Journalism Podcast. My name is John Zigler. I'm your
host on today's show. The Trump Putin Summit is essentially
a rorshack test for how you view Trump. Putin provokes
Trump to go to war against mail in balloting. Gavin
Newsom decides he is the new Trump. The Taylor Swift
(00:21):
interview on the Kelsey Podcast is historic, and the destruction
of sports as we know it seems to be accelerating.
We begin this episode of the podcast with a personal note.
This is the official end of summer today in the
Zigler household because it was the first day of school.
(00:43):
As you probably know, my wife is a public school
teacher and this year one of her students will be
our seventh grade daughter, Grace, and also we have a
third grade daughter, Diana, both of whom started school today
as well. This is a big day in any family,
but for us it's particularly significant for a number of reasons,
(01:04):
not just the fact that Grace will be a student
of her mom's officially this year for at least one class,
but also because we take summers very, very very seriously
in our family, mainly because my wife does understandably so.
She lives a very grinding existence as a special ed
(01:27):
public school teacher, and those two months or so that
she has offer for the summer are basically all she
looks forward to all year long, and our trip to
Yosemite and usually some secondary trip and just the ability
to be away from school. Summer is everything to my wife,
and obviously summer is huge to my daughters, and when
(01:51):
it ends, it ends hard. The entire environment, the weather
system of our family dramatically changes in the days leading
up to the first day of school. I have learned
long ago that basically the worst two periods of the
year are just after Christmas and just as summer vacation
(02:12):
is ending. I now have to space at least the
next nine months of my wife having to go through
the absurdities of liberal public school education, and of course
complaining about it on a daily basis, which is understandable,
but I now have to deal with that, and of
course she gets very upset at me because I'm staying
at home and she's going off to work, and it's
(02:35):
just a completely night and day existence between summertime and
school year. And you know, as you get older, I'm
fifty eight, and you start to realize that the time
is quickly escaping from your grasp, and you look at
the fact that you have two young kids, and you really,
(02:56):
when it comes down to it, if you think about
summers being real the focal point of the entire year,
with two young daughters with a five year age gap,
you really only have seven or eight prime summers, and
we're down to our last couple I mean, in other words,
where both kids are young and interested in someone of
(03:18):
the same things and they at least most of the
time get along, and this summer will be impossible to beat.
I mean, this will likely go down as our best
summer ever. We had all sorts of activities, the weather
was amazing, there were no logistical major logistical problems. No
one got hurt, no one was unhealthy. We did everything
(03:39):
we wanted, We had visits from the grandparents. Everything that
could possibly go well went well, and nothing went wrong.
And there's a very good chance that we're never going
to exceed that we may never even meet what happened
this particular summer. But there's a downside to that because
now it's over, and now we begin the school year,
(04:00):
and everything in the Zigler household is going to change
almost entirely for the worst. Although our little daughter, Diana,
third grader, is very much looking forward to school because
she's really good at it, she enjoys it, she makes
friends easily, so there's at least that positive aspect of it.
But it is now going to be a very new
(04:20):
era in the Zigler family now that school has started.
And I will say one more time, not what I
say matters at all, but I'm a big believer that
we are starting school way too early. I think we've
lost something in labor day no longer being relevant. I mean,
for all different sorts of reasons. I can go through them,
(04:41):
and probably will at some other point, but I think
we have lost a lot in our society, one simply
by the communal moment. I mean, everybody starts school at
a different time period now, so nobody has anything in common.
Everyone ends school at a different time period now. And
there are all sorts of aspects of what used to
be American life when labor day mattered and most of
(05:04):
the time you went to school after labor Day that
are no longer in existence. One of them, by the way,
is that this drives me crazy, and no one ever,
mentions that high school football is now essentially a summer
sport because you start it in the middle of August
and you end it unless you make the playoffs even
before Halloween, depending on the calendar. And that's just brog
(05:25):
in my opinion. But that's another story for another day.
So that's the situation with regard to the Zigler family. Obviously,
the big news story of the last week was the
summit in Alaska between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. I
will mention one more time because I did at the
end of last week's episode of the podcast that somewhere,
(05:46):
although I haven't seen it in the interviews with her
taking a victory lap, Sarah Palin has to feel some
sense of vindication after she was unfairly mocked in the
two thousand and eight election for making the factual statement
to Charlie Gibson ABC News that you can see parts
of Russia from land here in Alaska, and that of
(06:07):
course is true. It was mocked by Tina Fey on
Saturday Night Live, where she turned that into I can
see Russia from my house, which to this day, it's
extraordinary to me how many people seem to believe that
that's essentially what she said, and the media did a
horrendous job of sifting fact from fiction and letting people
(06:29):
know that, Yeah, oh, by the way, Russia and Alaska
are effectively the same land mass in some areas. In fact,
Alaska used to be part of Russia, and during certain
times of the year you can theoretically walk from Alaska
to Russia. And that's why they had the summit in Alaska.
And it was remarkable to me as someone who did
(06:51):
a documentary film about the two thousand and eight election.
It featured an exclusive interview with Sarah Palin. That was
one of the subjects that we dealt with. How many
people were suddenly now acknowledging gee, you know, Sarah Plen
was actually right about this, And even I was kind
of stunned by do you really not have any basic
knowledge of geography? It's not that difficult. I realized that
(07:15):
for most people it's not top of mind. But if
you you know, it takes two seconds to investigate it,
it's not a difficult concept. But that was one of
the more remarkable elements of the Trump Putin summit as
far as I was concerned, given the history of that
whole situation in my small role in it now, as
far as the summit itself, you know, I have been
(07:38):
critical of the way Trump has handled this whole Ukraine
Russia situation in the big picture. From a strategic standpoint,
I mean, we have to remember this is a guy
who on multiple occasions claimed that he could end this
war in one day. That's what he said. Expectations are
everything in life, and he created the expectation that this
(08:00):
would be a situation that would be easily ended, that
he and he alone could do it in one day.
And obviously, you know, we're at the end of August
now and we're nowhere near apparently an end to the
war between Russia and Ukraine. And my biggest criticism of
Trump from a strategic standpoint, I've been baffled by this
(08:22):
because negotiating is Trump's forte. I mean, he's the guy
who wrote the book The Art of the Deal, that's
what he's most well known for. It seems to me
as if it's been a major mistake to go to
Russia first, right, I mean, if you're going to do
this it strategically he is, he has said publicly in
(08:46):
that infamous meeting, was Elensky that Zelensky has no cards.
He's acknowledged publicly that Russia has the cards, Russia has
the leverage, and so to me, what happened in this
summit was a bit belated because because originally it seems
as if Trump's plan was go to Zelensky first, find
(09:06):
out what he will accept, and then go to Putin. Well,
that can't work because inherently, if Putin knows he has
the leverage, and you Trump have said publicly to the
world that he has the leverage, there ain't no way
in God's creation that he's going to accept any deal
that's close to what Zelensky says is okay, it's just
(09:30):
basic negotiating. If you know you have the leverage, what
the guy with no leverage once is a non starter.
You have to go to the person with leverage and
figure out what will they accept, what's the bare minimum
they will accept, and then you go back to Zelensky
and say, Okay, do you want to eat the shit
(09:50):
sandwich or not? Do you want the war to end
or not? Well, it seems as if that that was
at least an improvement, you know, going literally halfway. I
guess you would call it to Putin to meet him
in Alaska to find out, Okay, what will it take
to end this situation? However, and I said it in
(10:11):
the intro, this whole situation really is a rorshack test
for how you've view Trump if you don't like Trump.
There was a lot, a lot to be very cynical
about and very critical about when it came to this
entire summit. The idea that Trump literally rolled out the
(10:33):
red carpet that he was applauding Putin. You know, he
had to be to bomber flyover, I mean basically treating
Putin like a conquering hero. And we all know the
history of this situation, where it's been very obvious that
Trump has at least some admiration for Putin. Now he's
made some more critical comments more recently indicating that Putin
(10:57):
keeps fooling him and isn't to be trusted. And yet
it seems as if Trump was more than willing to
trust Putin, at least on the things that he liked
that Putin said. Many of them had absolutely nothing to
do with the situation regarding the war with Ukraine. So
I did not like the tone that was created by
(11:19):
Trump but as someone who's always been very fair, maybe
more fair than he deserves. The Trump, I'm willing because
he has been able to pull the rabbit out of
the hat in the past. I'm at least willing to
give him some latitude, give him some space here. Maybe
(11:39):
his craziness will actually work here. So I'm not making
any conclusions about how this is all going to end.
I'm just saying this is not the way I would
do it, not the way it would make sense to
do it, and I don't think it's right to treat
putin this way. And it didn't appear, and I want
to underline appear as if it worked, at least in
(12:00):
the short run, because, based upon the conventional way of
looking at these summits, this had all the signs of
at least a borderline disaster and maybe a total disaster.
The way these things work is ta leaves matter. Very
(12:23):
seemingly small gestures are understandably extrapolated to interpret what actually transpired. Now,
maybe Trump has so changed the world that that matrix
is no longer relevant, that prism through which we see
events no longer really matters. I'm open to that possibility. However,
(12:46):
you cannot deny that there were several very concerning elements
of this whole situation. I mean, first of all, the
lunch got canceled. Second of all, there was no real
press conference. There were no questions asked of Putin or
Trump at this quote unquote press event. Maybe most concerningly,
(13:08):
that event was totally dominated by Vladimir Putin. I mean,
it is astonishing that an American president, on American soil,
took part in a press event that was begun by
Vladimir Putin and dominated by Vladimir Putin dominated. Now, is
(13:33):
it possible that Trump agreed to that. It's hard for
me to believe that he did, but it certainly did
seem appear. It is easily to perceive that Putin had
the upper hand in this whole situation. And that's certainly
consistent with what we know of the history of this situation,
specifically the relationship between Putin and Trump. My gosh, Trump's
(13:58):
own words have been that Putin keeps lying to him
and that Trump's sick and damn tired of it, and
continuing with this narrative that Putin really manipulated Trump and
got the better of him. Putin apparently on two separate occasions,
one publicly and one privately, whispered sweet nothings into Trump's
(14:22):
ear about two subjects that anybody with any knowledge of
Trump would know would be an area where it was
incredibly easy for Trump to be manipulated. His weak spots.
I mean, everybody knows that Trump has a weak spot
in his ego, and everybody knows that Trump has a
(14:43):
weak spot when it comes to previous elections, specifically the
twenty twenty election being rigged against him, and Putin, very
smartly from a manipulation perspective, said publicly that if Trump
had been pro resident, something that Trump has said many
times previously, that if Trump had been president and had
(15:05):
won the twenty twenty election, that there would be no
war between Russia and Ukraine. Now, I have absolutely no
idea if that's true or not. It could be true,
it could be false, it could be Playton propaganda and
overt manipulation. But that's what Putin said publicly, and of
(15:26):
course that's gonna butter up Trump. I mean that is
I mean, my gosh, that is as obvious an act
of attempted manipulation as you could possibly imagine, and it
seemingly worked. On Trump, and I always find it amazing.
I mean, Maggot World baffles me in so many ways,
(15:48):
but the inconsistency of their analysis of people and concepts
and world events is just mind blowing. But I've even
publicly asked for a chart, a Maga chart for when
Putin is telling the truth and when he's absolutely not
to be trusted. Could somebody please show me that, because
(16:11):
when Putin said that if Trump had been president, there
never would have been a war, Maga World completely accepted
that as one hundred percent true. I have no idea
if it's true, But I also know that Putin has
a massive self interest to lie about that because he
knows that Trump is going to lap that up. It's
(16:33):
going to stroke Trump's ego, It's going to make Trump
vulnerable to Putin's manipulation. And it seems as if it worked,
because it wasn't just what would have happened had Trump
won the twenty twenty election. According to Trump, Putin actually
(16:55):
told Trump he did win the twenty twenty election because
of voter fraud and specifically mail in ballots. Now, I
have no idea how much expertise Putin has when it
comes to American mail in ballots. But this was an
absolutely extraordinary moment on Fox News Channel in an interview
(17:19):
that Donald Trump did with Sean Hannity. And I think
this is a great example of how desensitized we have
become by the entire Trump era. I mean, this is
one of those situations that you know, certainly ten years
ago would have been absolutely so bonkers that it's all
(17:39):
anybody would be talking about. And frankly, I don't think
this got nearly as much attention as it probably deserved,
largely because of the desensitization. But here is the President
of the United States telling Sean Hannity the Vladimir Putin
during a summit about the Ukraine War, where this subject
(18:04):
really should have no relevance whatsoever, that Donald Trump actually
won the twenty twenty election because of mail in ballots
not being credible and or secure. And here's what that
sounded like on Fox News Channel.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
Oh, Vladimir Putin said something one of the most interesting things.
He said, your election was rigged because you have mail
in voting. He said, mail in voting every election. He said,
no country has mail in voting. It's impossible to have
mail in voting, and have honest elections. And he said
that to me, it was very truck because we talked
(18:43):
about twenty twenty. He said, you won that election by
so much, and that's how he got it, he said,
And if you.
Speaker 1 (18:47):
Would have won, we wouldn't have had a war.
Speaker 2 (18:49):
You'd have all these millions of people alive now instead
of dead. And he said, and you lost it because
of mail in voting.
Speaker 3 (18:56):
It was a rigged election.
Speaker 2 (18:57):
But male in voting, Sean.
Speaker 1 (19:00):
Now, to be clear, I hate mail in balloting. We
have universal mail in balloting here in California, and I
think it is a complete joke. I think it is
ripe for voter fraud. Not in the ways that Maga
world thinks, but in my opinion. You know, it's obvious
(19:22):
that that younger relatives vote for elderly relatives. It's incredibly
easy for that to happen. Spouses vote for spouses in
ways that I might not be consistent with their true intent.
I have concerns about nursing homes and how ballots are
(19:42):
are treated there, and whether or not that could be
an area where a lot of people are voting for
somebody else. I realize that a lot of people are
very concerned about ballot harvesting, and I do think that's
a valid concern. But I bottom line is I hate
mail in, especially universe mail in balloting. And so it's
(20:03):
not as if on the issue I disagree with Trump
or I guess Putin. But the idea that Trump is
even focused on this during a summit where he's trying
to come to a peace deal on a war, and
where he doesn't even appear to understand that Putin is
(20:23):
obviously and clearly manipulating him, whether he's telling the truth
or not, is just beyond extraordinary. And it's a further indication,
using the rorshack test analogy, that if you have a
negative or cynical view of Trump, there's a lot of
(20:44):
information here, a lot of data points that makes you go,
wait a minute, this did not go well at all?
Did Trump get rolled? And one of those data points
was an extraordinary report on Fox News Chat by a
reporter by the name of Jackie Henrich, who was there
(21:04):
in the room. Now she's on Fox News Channel, effectively
state run television. Although Magoworld turns on Fox News Channel
at every moment that they don't it's about nothing but
positive talking points about Donald Trump. But here was a
section of Heinrich report from the room where the press
(21:27):
conference between Putin or press event between Putin and Trump
took place, that went viral and provoked an enormous amount
of backlash from Magaworld online. Here was Fox News Channel
reporting that, you know, it didn't feel like things went
(21:47):
nearly as well for Trump as we had hoped or expected.
And here's what it sounded like on Fox News Channel.
Speaker 4 (21:55):
Happened back there.
Speaker 5 (21:56):
It was just very unusual, atypical, and I think we're
all awaiting the readout because the way that it felt
in the room was not good. It did not seem
like things went well, and it seemed like Putin came
in and steamrolled, got right into what he wanted to say,
and got his photo next to the president and then left.
(22:18):
Of course, that is only the piece of the picture
that we have right now, and certainly President Trump, who
is the host and who is the president, would not
want to, I think, enable something that would make him
look weak. But we are eagerly awaiting to hear the
background on that. And I will also note that we
didn't see any sort of scowls on the faces of
(22:39):
the likes of Steve Witcoff or Secretary Rubio or any
of the other members of the US delegation. And I
think had it been concerning, we might have seen something there.
But just just to paint a picture for you of
in the room, how it felt, what we're wondering about,
what we need to know to put the pieces together
and fully understand, but we all just witnessed.
Speaker 1 (22:59):
Now, when I saw that, I was like, oh my gosh,
she is going to get an enormous amount of backlash.
I believed what she was saying, or I believe that
she thought that that was the truth of the matter,
based upon her first hand observations. By the way, there
were other reporters who had similar observations about what was
(23:20):
going on, but of course they don't work for Fox NewsChannel.
The fact that this was a Fox News Channel report
was why it was considered to be so significant, why
it went viral, and why it created so much backlash,
and so much backlash that later on the reporter was
(23:41):
told by an anchor, well, you know, Trump is telling
people privately that the meeting went as a ten out
of ten or something to that effect, and she basically
backed down. Oh good, glad to hear it like, I
mean that that's not journalism. First of all, what Trump
says privately trying to put lipstick on a potential pig
(24:03):
is not very credible. Now I realize Trump is always
gonna declare victory. That's the one of the core tenets
of Trump's entire modus operaan day. Always, always, always declare victory.
Everything is always awesome. And so to me, that doesn't
have a lot of weight, especially when it's done on
(24:25):
background to a Fox News Channel reporter or anchor, and
then that gets used as a way to try to
force the reporter on the scene to back down from
their observations which were not at all positive. Again, I
want to emphasize, is it possible that you know, Trump
has a greater plan here, or that Trump's craziness is
(24:46):
actually gonna work in the end? Yeah, I think that's possible.
I don't know if it will. I don't know if
it won't. But on the surface, based upon the facts
we have and based upon basic observations and basic common sense,
I don't think this went well, and I don't think
this situation is likely to end in a very good
(25:09):
deal or any deal at all, necessarily, and My opinion
on that was further solidified by Secretary of State Marc
or Rubio, who I like, who I supported in the
twenty sixteen presidential election against Donald Trump, and who normally
is really really good on these Sunday morning television shows.
(25:32):
He went on I think three of them, maybe more
than that on Sunday to try to spin what happened
with regard to the Trump Putin summit, and frankly, I
didn't think Rubio fared that well. It may not have
been his fault because he didn't have a very good
fact pattern with which to work, but you know, I
thought it was particularly interesting that when he went and
(25:53):
faced the nation with Margaret Brennan, and Margaret Brennan has been,
you know, getting her ass kicked by Rue and other
members of the Trump administration throughout this entire year, so
I felt this was particularly significant that even Margaret Brennan
seemed to get the better of Mark or Rubio when
it came to just the basics of what appears to
(26:17):
be shaping up as a potential deal that is very
very much in the favor of Putin and Russia. I
talked about how this problem, this inherent negotiating problem where
one side, where even Trump is acknowledged, one side has
the leverage, one side has the cards. Well, you have
(26:38):
to go to them first, and you have to hope
that they're at least somewhat reasonable so that you can
go to the side without the leverage in this case
Ukraine and Zelensky and say will you accept most or
all of this so that we can get a piece deal. Well,
Putin seems to be overplaying his hand, which is consistent
(26:58):
with his history, and who could blame him when Trump
himself told the whole world that Zelenski doesn't have any cards.
So Putin appears to be asking for the world effectively
and putting the United States and Ukraine in a seemingly
almost impossible situation because in order to get a deal,
(27:22):
they're going to have to capitulate to Putin in Russia
in an extraordinary fashion, even giving Putin land that he
didn't even quote unquote win in the war. And here's
what it sounded like on CBS when Margaret Brennan interviewed
and asked pretty pointed questions of Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Speaker 4 (27:43):
Ultimately, if Vladimir Putin is going to be offered land
that he has not seized yet but negotiates his way into.
Doesn't this set a dangerous precedent that the United States
now accepts this concept that it is okay to seize
land by force.
Speaker 6 (28:04):
Well, Putin's already sees land by force, and that in
and of itself is not a positive precedent this.
Speaker 1 (28:09):
Whole war demand withdrawal for precedent.
Speaker 6 (28:12):
Well, again, here's the In order to have a deal
here to in to reach the end of this conflict,
both sides are going to have to make concessions. That's
just a fact any negotiation. No, no, But but this is
not about accepting. This is about what Ukraine can accept
and what Russia can accept. They both have to accept it,
otherwise there won't be a peace deal. Okay, if there
aren't concessions, if one side gets everything they want, that's
(28:35):
called surrender. That's called the end of the war through surrender.
And that's not what we're close to doing, because neither
side here is on the verge of surrender anything close
to it. So in order for there to be a
peace deal, this is just a fact. We may not
like it, it may not be pleasant, it may be distasteful,
but in order for there to be an end of
the war, there are things Russia wants that it cannot
get and there are things Ukraine wants that it's not
going to get. Both sides are going to have to
(28:57):
give up something in order to get to the table
in order to make this happen. That's just the way
it is. And I mean, the sooner we accept that
that's the reality. Now what those things are, it's going
to be up to both sides. There's no conditions that
can be imposed on Ukraine. They're going to have to
accept things, but they're gonna have to get things too.
And so, for example, Ukraine is a sovereign country. They
have a right like every sovereign country does in the world,
(29:19):
to have the enter into security alliances with other countries
to prevent an invasion in the future, to prevent threats
to the national security. That's not an unreasonable request. That's
something needs to be worked on. Territories will have to
be discussed. It's just a fact. And there are things
that maybe Russia's holding now that they're going to have
to give up, who knows. The point is, we need
to create a scenario where that becomes possible. And that's
(29:40):
why this has been so hard, because neither side up
to now has been willing to give on some of
these things.
Speaker 1 (29:46):
But we'll see if that's possible.
Speaker 6 (29:48):
It may not be, but we're gonna try, and we're
gonna do everything we can to try to achieve a peace.
Speaker 1 (29:52):
So to me, Rubio and his answers there are not
particularly compelling or convincing or confidence inducing that there can
be a deal here where Putin doesn't dramatically benefit from
having invaded Ukraine. And that's a problem. And to the
(30:14):
larger point of okay, you know, you go to Putin first,
you find out what he will accept, then you go
to Zelenski. Well, Zelenski came to the White House, to Washington,
d C. It's important to point out he didn't come alone.
Many European leaders came with him because I think they
were terrified of the idea that Donald Trump was essentially
the lone mediator in this situation. And and look, I
(30:37):
mean I don't like Zelinsky at all. I mean I
don't like Zelensky hardly anymore than I like Putin. I
mean I like him maybe a little bit more, but
not by much so I don't like anybody here. I've
said this many times. I don't have a dog in
this hut. I don't trust any of the of the
main actors here. I'm not sure this situation is directly
in our in our own uh you know, spear of interest.
(31:01):
I mean it's important I acknowledge that, and maybe nobody
else can negotiate an end to this because of our
unique role. But to me, this has not been the
most important issue. I'm much more of a domestic guy.
But the bottom line of this is that if you
have I don't like it. I don't like Zelensky, but
you've got to have Zelensky on board, and so you
(31:23):
bring him. And if you're Zelensky, you got to be
a bit concerned that Donald Trump is the guy who
has your fate in his hands. And I think European
leaders were very concerned about that, and they came to Washington,
d C. With him in a show of support. And
you know, that meeting with Trump seemed to go a
(31:45):
lot better. Certainly couldn't have gotten much worse than the
infamous meeting earlier this year where Trump declared to the
world that Zelensky doesn't have the cards and that Putin
has all the leverage, which I think we're still paying
for as of this moment. But there were a couple
of very strange moments in that meeting that I think
(32:07):
just show how effective Putin's manipulation of Trump was, as
well as how easily Trump is distracted, because there were
two situations that occurred during the public meeting with Zelenski
in front of the press at the White House, where
(32:29):
Trump ended up talking about American elections and at least
hopefully trolling or joking even about the twenty twenty six
or twenty twenty eight elections being canceled, which of course,
(32:50):
you know, drives people crazy because that's the fear that
Trump's going to run for a third term or we're
not going to have democracy and he'll be able to
stay in office into perpetuity until he does, and he's
a monarch, and all of which you know, I find concerning,
but I also acknowledge is mostly a joke. But I
do think that there are certain times and places and
(33:11):
subjects about which you don't joke, and this is clearly
one of them. And so there are two clips from
this Zelenski meeting where Trump gets totally sidetracked on election issues. Again,
it's important to point out Putin put him down this
path because Putin has now further convinced him that he
won the twenty twenty election, which he did not. And
(33:34):
you know, Trump uses the opportunity of Zelenski being there.
And it's important to point out Ukraine did cancel an
election because they were in the middle of a war
with Russia, which I do think is a unique situation.
I'm not supporting it, I'm not defending it, but we
aren't Ukraine either. I see a lot of people online saying, well,
(33:54):
if they did it, you know, why can't we do it.
Trump's just showing the hypocrisy of the situation. No, we're
the United States of America. We're held to a different standard,
at least should be than Ukraine. And so here's the
first of these two clips from the Zelensky meeting, where
Trump uses Zelensky to try to show that, you know,
(34:15):
if he really wanted to, I guess he could cancel
the election. Of course, his fans think he's joking and
trolling the left, which I would like to believe is
in fact the case. But I still believe it's highly inappropriate.
And here's what that sounded like at the White House.
Speaker 3 (34:32):
Legal elections, So you shay during it. During the war,
you can't have elections. So let me just say three
and a half years from now.
Speaker 2 (34:41):
So you mean, if we happen to be in a
war with somebody, no more elections.
Speaker 3 (34:46):
So I wonder what the fake I got a question
for you? This legal elections?
Speaker 2 (34:56):
So you shay during it. During the war, you can't
have election. So let me just say three and a
half years from now. So you mean, if we happen
to be in.
Speaker 3 (35:05):
A war with somebody, no more elections. So I wonder
what the fai? I got a question for you? This
sounds the fate.
Speaker 1 (35:18):
Now, that's just inappropriate. That's wrong. You know, to use
an incredibly significant meeting with a foreign leader where you're
trying to broke your peace with Russia and you're in
front of the world press to even joke about the
fact that you might cancel our presidential elections is totally wrong.
(35:40):
And I get that Trump was very likely joking, But
that's the way that a fire wall, see there needs
to be. If we used to believe in firewalls, we
used to believe that the slippery slope was a very
dangerous concept. We've forgotten that for some reason. But there
needs to be firewalls to protect the core. And obviously
(36:04):
the core of the United States of America is that
we have free and democratic elections, and we have a
presidential election every four years, come hell or high water, right.
And the way that that firewar wall gets diminished is
by joking about it and having the President of the
United States joke about it and desensitize people to the
(36:27):
absurdity of the concept. And yes, I'm willing to acknowledge
this was a joke, this was a troll, but it
has significance. It has significance in the long run, if
only by the way, this is probably the best case scenario.
Let's say Trump has absolutely positively no interest in serving
past twenty twenty eight, which is the most likely scenario, right,
(36:50):
But the next time someone jokes about this or makes
an allusion to this kind of thing, they can rely
on the idea, well, Trump did it, Why can't I
do it. I'm just joking, and maybe they won't be joking.
My point is that over time we get desensitized that
(37:11):
the slippery slope matters, and that you must maintain a
firewall to prevent these kind of things from ever coming
close to happening, and that means you don't joke about it.
As the president of the United States, especially in such
a highly charged and highly public situation. This was totally
(37:34):
wrong for Trump to do this, even if it was
a joke, even if it was a troll that his
fans love, because they know it drives the liberal media crazy.
You know what, the liberal media absolutely should go crazy
in a situation like this, And if a Democratic president
ever did this, the right wing media would be going bananas.
(37:57):
But of course they don't in this situation, because Trump
has all ready set the predicate that he's a jokester,
he's a troll artist. And I'm sorry, even if that's
the case, which I'm willing to acknowledge, is the farley.
The farley by far the most likely scenario. That is
still a dangerous situation. You're still starting us down the
(38:22):
slippery slope because at a certain point, the line between
joking and you're not sure if someone's joking, oh my god,
they're serious, and oh my gosh. Much of the public
has been desensitized to this entire issue, and now maybe
they can get away with it is not that far fetched.
(38:43):
And for Trump to do it basically just to tickle
his base and to tickle his own fancy and to
give himself a thrill because he's trolling his enemies is wrong.
It's selfish, it's wrong, it's stupid, and it's dangerous. But
that wasn't the only time during this meeting with Zelenski
that Trump decided that American elections, and very specifically issues
(39:10):
that make him feel better about himself, were worthy of
being discussed. And this is not a coincidence that, if
we believe Trump putin whispered this into his ear, that
all of a sudden, Trump is now fully at war
with the issue of mail in balloting. Before the Zelensky meeting,
(39:31):
he put out a social media post saying that he's
signing an executive order that's going to attempt to ban
mail in voting, which I don't have any idea how
in the world Trump thinks he has the authority to
do that. We do not have federal elections in this country.
We have state and local elections, and so I do
(39:53):
not know how in the world Trump thinks he has
the authority to do this. But it's not a coincid
science that putin whispers in his ear in Alaska. He
comes back and declares via social media plans for this
executive order, which I don't think is going to have
any real power, at least not in the Blue and
(40:15):
Purple States. Maybe in the Red States, but that wasn't
an issue to begin with, because the Red States are
the only ones that are really listening to most of
these executive orders. But here, in this very high profile,
very important meeting, Trump gets asked about the issue, largely
because he had just put out a social media post
about it, and he goes on a diatribe again, one
(40:38):
that in principle I agree with, although I think that
Trump focuses on the wrong elements that are problematic regarding
mail in balloting. But here was Donald Trump again at
the White House, going off on a diatribe about stopping
mail in voting, something that I don't believe he is
(40:59):
the authority to actually do.
Speaker 3 (41:01):
Pushed out on social media about doing away with mail
in ballots and potentially electronic voting machines. Can you expend
on that help port Well, that's a very off topic.
Speaker 7 (41:10):
Just really quickly, mail in ballots are corrupt mail in ballots.
You can never have a real democracy with mail in ballants,
and we as a Republican party, are going to do
everything possible that we get rid of mail in ballots.
We're going to start with an executive order that's being
written right now by the best lawyers in the country
(41:31):
to end mail in ballots because they're corrupt. And do
you know that we're the only country in the world
I believe I may be wrong, but just about the.
Speaker 3 (41:41):
Only country in the.
Speaker 7 (41:41):
World that uses them because of what's happened, massive fraud
all over the place.
Speaker 3 (41:46):
The other thing, we want change of the machines.
Speaker 8 (41:49):
For all of the money they spend, it's approximately ten
times more expensive than paper ballots, and paper ballots are
very sophisticated with the watermark paper and everything else.
Speaker 3 (42:00):
We would get secure.
Speaker 7 (42:01):
Elections, we'd get much faster results the machines. I mean
they say we're going to have the results in two weeks.
With paper ballots, you have the results that night. Most
people almost but most people many countries use paper ballots.
Speaker 3 (42:15):
It's the most secure form.
Speaker 7 (42:17):
So between paper ballots, very very important paper ballots and
I think maybe even more important the mail in voting.
Speaker 3 (42:25):
We're going to end mail in voting. It's a fraud
if you have mail.
Speaker 7 (42:30):
Even Jimmy Carter with this commission, they set it up,
he said.
Speaker 3 (42:33):
The one thing about mail in voting, you.
Speaker 7 (42:35):
Will never have an honor selection if you have mail
in it. And it's time that the Republicans get tough
and stop it because the Democrats want it. It's the
only way they can get elected because with men and
women's sports, and with transgender for everybody, and open borders and.
Speaker 3 (42:52):
All of the horrible things. And now the new thing
is they love crime.
Speaker 7 (42:56):
They're fighting me on the fact that I've made DC safe.
Speaker 3 (43:01):
We're not going to get mugged, beaten.
Speaker 7 (43:02):
Up or killed like all the people you've been watching
get so badly hurt.
Speaker 3 (43:07):
I'm glad.
Speaker 7 (43:08):
I hate to take your time with this, but I'm
glad you asked me that question, sir. We're going to
stop mail in ballots because it's corrupt. You know, when
you go to a voting booth and you do it
the right way, and you go to a state that
runs it properly, you go in. They even ask me.
They asked me for my license plate for identify. I said,
I don't know if I have it, he said, sir,
(43:29):
you have to have it. They're very impressed, actually, but
it's very hard to cheat with mail in voting. As
you know what happens in California. It's so corrupt where
some people get five, six, seven ballots delivered to them.
Speaker 3 (43:43):
Now, we got to stop mail in voting, and the
Republicans have to lead the charge.
Speaker 7 (43:47):
The Democrats want it because they have horrible policy. If
you have mail in voting, you're not going to have
many Democrats get elected again.
Speaker 1 (43:54):
I want to emphasize I hate mail in balloting as
much as a Trump does. I think maybe more so
because of the fact that we have it universally in
the state of California. But I don't believe that mail
in balloting is why Trump lost the twenty twenty election.
(44:17):
This is clearly why he cares so much about it,
because he thinks it's the path. By the way, whatever
happened to the dominion voting systems situation. We'll get to
more of that in a second, because there's a settlement
legally in that circumstance. But you know, the narrative has
changed pretty significantly on how Trump had the twenty twenty
(44:38):
elections stolen from him. It used to be rigged, Now
it's mail in balloting. Look, I think the twenty twenty
election should have an asterisk because of COVID. I mean,
I have been very very clear that COVID was used
as a weapon to destroy the economy and to fundamentally
(44:59):
alter the nature of that election. And yes, the way
that that election was actually conducted, and yes, that's why
Joe Biden got a record number of votes because we
had universal mail in balloting. And I have no doubt
that there was fraud. I don't think it was organized.
I don't think it was large enough to be the
(45:20):
difference between Trump winning and losing, because it really wasn't
all that close in twenty twenty. But I fully acknowledge
that the twenty twenty election was a farce, but it
was not stolen and it was not rigged. That being said,
I hate mail in balloting. I don't think Trump has
(45:41):
the authority to do what he's claiming he's going to do.
And I don't understand how this becomes a major issue
while you're trying to come up with a peace plan
between Russia and Ukraine, and even Trump seemingly felt badly
about raising the issue during that event, which shows you
just how bad it must be for Trump to even
(46:02):
feel guilty about it. You know that it's totally inappropriate
to be raising this issue at that time, but you
can't take away the context of the fact that, according
to Trump, it was Putin who whispered this in his
ear just a couple of days before. I mean, there's
a direct line. I'm sorry, folks, there's a direct line
(46:24):
between Putin saying that to Trump and Alaska and now
Trump going to war against mail in balloting. And by
the way, and you know, my opinion on the whole
Russia Gate situation is extremely nuanced. I'm not going to
go through it again. Yes, the media completely blew it.
Yes it was way overblown. Yes there was no direct collusion. However,
(46:47):
it's clear that Russia did attempt to help Trump, and
that Trump did some things he should never have done,
and he was trying to hide those things, and those
attempts to hide things got misinterpreted as him being some
sort of a Manchurian candidate. I mean, that's the short
version of what happened. The Steele dossier was wrong, but
(47:07):
I don't believe that there was some sort of massive
conspiracy to have a coup against Trump. So I have
basically my opinion on Russiagate is not shared by anybody,
and it doesn't please anybody. But the reality here is
it's not exactly a great argument that Russiagate in twenty
(47:31):
sixteen was completely bullshit and there was nothing to it.
When you are taking the word of Vladimir Putin that
the twenty twenty election was rigged against you, and then
using Putin's testimony to you to motivate you to fundamentally
(47:52):
alter the nature of our elections going forward, and oh,
by the way, joking that you might cancel the next
presidential election. I mean, I'm sorry, folks. I mean I'm
not saying that that means that there was more to it.
I'm just saying that that's that's not a real great
fact pattern. If that's your argument, and part of it's
(48:16):
Trump being Trump, I get it. I understand all that,
but I don't think that as of right now, there's
any signs that this has been effective and trying to
get a piece deal. I think it shows that he
is easily manipulated by Putin and that he is being
manipulated now. I mean, there was the situation during the
(48:37):
meeting with Zelensky where apparently Trump called Putin and decided
to talk to him alone, which I don't have a
huge problem with. I get as a as a mediator
that you want everyone to have privacy and you want
to be able to say things more freely without you know,
Zelensky hearing exactly how the sausage is being made. I
(48:58):
get all that, but it's also concerning and as far
as the bottom line deal, look, Trump has a huge advantage,
a huge advantage here politically when it comes to making
any sort of a piece deal, Trump can basically and
this would worry me if I was Lenski, Trump can
(49:18):
make almost any piece deal as long as the piece
maintains itself, and his base is going to praise the
hell out of it one because they don't care about
the details. They don't understand the details. They don't really
care if Putin gets things that he doesn't deserve, they
(49:39):
don't really care if Ukraine gets screwed in the situation.
They just want peace and the details don't matter. So
Trump has wide latitude in doing almost anything he wants
when it comes to a deal. Politically, he can sell
Ukraine out as much as he wants. Frankly, to me,
(50:01):
that's about the only way you're likely to get a
deal at this point. And I only talk about things
that I consider myself to be highly educated on, or
maybe some sort of an expert on or have a
great interest in, and the Ukraine Russia war has never
been one of them. But and so I'm not going
to claim that I have some great insight into what
(50:21):
this deal is going to look like. I'm just looking
at the big picture as to who has the leverage
and where Trump's loyalties and self interest lies. And I
don't think it bodes well for a good deal. I
do think that there could be a deal because Trump
is very much invested in trying to get a deal,
especially since it is perceived as this summit was not
(50:43):
a success. There was no cease fire agreement, and as
of this taping, there's no sign that we're closed to
a peace deal to end the Ukraine Iraq War. But obviously,
you know, I hope that there is a deal. I
hope it's a decent deal. I would love to see
this this story go away. I'd love to see there'd
be peace, people stop dying, and if Trump can do it,
(51:03):
I'll give him credit. I mean, hey, hell, Hillary Clinton
even said she would vote for him for the nominate
him for the Nobel Peace Prize if he gets this done.
My interpretation of that was that she doesn't think it's possible.
I think I'm probably more in her camp that it's
just not possible because of the circumstances surrounding the negotiation.
Of course, you know, MAGA World thinks that this is
(51:24):
an indication. It's no bag of World is so crazy,
but they think that this is an indication that Hillary
knows that she's legally vulnerable, so she's trying to kiss
Trump's ass. I mean, it's no matter what she does
or says, it doesn't matter. It's it's just amazing. I mean,
just every conspiracy theory possible, Magaworld falls for every single time,
(51:44):
and they're almost always debunked, and it doesn't matter to
them when they actually get debunked. Of have a few
more thoughts than that. In a second, Thanks for listening
to today's free drop of the abbreviated show. If you're
interested in listening to the entire show, you must become
a pay Please go to Patreon. That's p A t
R e O N dot com. Patreon dot com slash
(52:10):
The Death of Journalism with John Ziggler. My name is
j O H N z I E G L e R.
That's Patreon dot com slash The Death of Journalism with
John Ziggler. Good luck to you on that. But that's
how you can subscribe.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.
The Charlie Kirk Show
Charlie is America's hardest working grassroots activist who has your inside scoop on the biggest news of the day and what's really going on behind the headlines. The founder of Turning Point USA and one of social media's most engaged personalities, Charlie is on the front lines of America’s culture war, mobilizing hundreds of thousands of students on over 3,500 college and high school campuses across the country, bringing you your daily dose of clarity in a sea of chaos all from his signature no-holds-barred, unapologetically conservative, freedom-loving point of view. You can also watch Charlie Kirk on Salem News Channel