Surprise_ Russia changes stance on peace with Ukraine _ Brian Kilmeade Show

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
First, let's get two the big three.

Speaker 2 (00:08):
Number three.

Speaker 3 (00:10):
You know, the city of Chicago does not need a
military occupied state.

Speaker 1 (00:16):
You know, these are federal troops. They do not go
through the.

Speaker 3 (00:18):
Training that our police officers go through, so they cannot
even enact police authority.

Speaker 4 (00:24):
That is Mayor Brandon Johnson, one of the worst mayors
of politicians in anybody's lifetime. Dems meet in Minneapolis amidst
the Jerry Manderin face off in a fight against a
Trump crime crackdown in horribly run blue cities. Next stop,
as you just heard, Chicago. The stakes could not be higher,
But it's the working class, law abiding urban families who
will benefit.

Speaker 5 (00:45):
Number two.

Speaker 1 (00:48):
Brothers and sisters, Brothers and sisters.

Speaker 6 (00:51):
My name is kilmar Abrego Garcia, and I want you
to remember this. Remember that I am free, and I
was able to be reunited with my family.

Speaker 1 (01:03):
Not anymore. Stands off.

Speaker 4 (01:05):
DEM scrambled to save law breaking a legal immigrant while
the Trump team pushes relentlessly to round him up. Where
it is, he's now in ice custody and he could
soon be heading to Uganda. Two cases tell the whole story,
and they are front and center today.

Speaker 2 (01:22):
Number One, We'll never target civilian, civilian sites that we all.

Speaker 5 (01:27):
Let that the sites which are directly.

Speaker 2 (01:30):
Involved in the Ukrainian military machine.

Speaker 4 (01:35):
Yes, like grammar schools. Vladimir Putin about to get punished.
Russia changes stances on peace with Ukraine, and this time
I look for Trump to take action. I'll explain as
Ukraine takes aim. And by the way, I know it's
not Vladimir Putin's Sergei Lavrov. And you think, well, that's
not what Putin says. It's exactly what Putin says when
he says, I'm not targeting. Prove to me, prove to

(01:56):
us that we're targeting civilian structures. That's all they're They're
getting a military they're not going for military targets. They're
losing twenty thousand a month when they go military to military.
Charlie heard Freyshew Fox and Friends Weekend filling in this
week for Lawrence joins us. Now, Charlie, it's a little
bit disappointing.

Speaker 1 (02:14):
A we could go today.

Speaker 4 (02:15):
There was a sense that maybe Vladimir Putin would be
moving in onto moving in in a way that we
could move forward with talks.

Speaker 1 (02:23):
It doesn't look like they want any part of it.

Speaker 7 (02:25):
Yeah, it does seem like they've stalled out. And as
President Trump has said many times, you know, when he
came into this, he thought this would have been one
of the easier things to figure out, and it's turning
out to be one of the more difficult things to
figure out. And certainly there was a lot of momentum
after last week. But I can't help but think that

(02:48):
that the President isn't getting a little annoyed by Putin
right now by some of this the gamesmanship here, and
it does make you wonder if we aren't going to
start seeing more dramatic sanctions.

Speaker 4 (03:07):
So if you want to talk about the borders of
the land you stole from the country forty two months ago,
and then you want to talk about international troops providing security,
that they've broken every agreement since nineteen ninety four, so
we'd have international troops there. They thought they decided on
a framework of that in Alaska, and they went over
details with the European leaders at the White House, and

(03:30):
now the Vladimir Putin says, no, we don't want any
international troops there.

Speaker 1 (03:35):
In terms of what Ukraine has.

Speaker 4 (03:37):
Asked to sacrifice, I think Alexander Stubb, the president of Finland,
good friend of President Trump, and who knows Putin well
said this cut eight.

Speaker 8 (03:46):
But I think for an American audience it's very important
to understand the issue of land here because if you
take what Putin is asking from Ukraine and juxtapose that
to the United States, it's a little bit like the
US giving up Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia,

(04:07):
even Maryland and creating some kind of a super highway
through which you can attack New York.

Speaker 4 (04:14):
That's the example, and that's still what Zelenski was looking
to deal with.

Speaker 7 (04:18):
Yeah, well, of course, I don't think anybody or no
sensible person thinks that Ukraine hasn't gotten screwed here, and
any negotiation isn't going to wind up getting screwed if
they end up giving up land. You know, the problem
has always been the appetite among Americans, both in terms

(04:39):
of boots on the ground, which they are hotly against,
but also the funding of the effort. The you know,
the concern I think for most voters is why isn't
this more Europe's problem? Why do we have to pay
for everything? And that's but in terms of you know,
do you know the answer for now, Well, it's that

(04:59):
shows actually buying the weapons from US. Yeah, And it's
actually kind of interesting even if you look at polling
within the United States, and I don't you know, I
think poles are full of it. I think you can
get a poll to say absolutely anything. The one kind
of pole that I do put stock in are polls
that ask the same question again and again of the

(05:19):
same groups of people over time, and you watch trends,
and what I do think is very interesting is something
has happened over the past six months where where American voters.

Speaker 5 (05:30):
Are more.

Speaker 1 (05:33):
Are more, are more aligned and.

Speaker 7 (05:36):
More sympathetic with UH with Ukraine than they were six
months ago. And I don't I can't explain why that is,
but I think it's interesting.

Speaker 4 (05:44):
I've just stumbled out to a great analogy. Sho I
share it with you and keep it to myself.

Speaker 1 (05:47):
Yeah, let's hear it. Let's hear your great analogy.

Speaker 4 (05:49):
So can you imagine you have an argument with your
spouse and you both say that's right hypothetically, So let's
just think of a reality show, okay, housewife show. So
you have a you have an argument with these spouts,
and everyone goes I don't know who's right or wrong.

Speaker 1 (06:03):
I'm not there. I don't know who's right or wrong. I'm
not there.

Speaker 4 (06:06):
So Trump came in and said, I don't know who's
right or wrong. I just want to I want you
guys to get along. Yeah, and then they brought the
cameras in. They go, we're gonna follow both here. And
it became clear, even with Selensky and the blow up
at the Oval office. So let's He's like, yeah, I
want peace. He's like, okay, now what about you. I
don't want peace. I've told you I want peace. But

(06:27):
you're seeing both sides, and you go, ladies and gentlemen,
you make the call.

Speaker 1 (06:32):
You've seen both sides.

Speaker 4 (06:33):
If Vitam been put in, unless he says, I don't
know what Lavrov has been saying over the last week,
I'm all for international troops on the doorstep. They're exposing
the problem, the invader, the bad guy. There was no
reason for this invasion. There was no Russian speaking people
that needed saving. There was no Russian Orthodox Church that

(06:53):
needed and it needed to be needed to absolve the Ukrainians.

Speaker 1 (06:58):
So this all was a folly.

Speaker 4 (06:59):
It was an excuse to invade a country to a
guy that wants to re establish the Soviet Union.

Speaker 7 (07:04):
But not not to justify anything. But you can't say
there's no reason for the invasion. There was a reason
which was invasion. Well for to listen to Vladimir Putin
say he had security has security concerns, which is that
NATO is encroaching closer. No, I know, but not here
to defend this. I'm simply saying the idea. You can't

(07:25):
approach this by saying there is no reason. He does
have a No, he made it up. Okay, you don't
like his reason, but he does have a reason, but
which is made up. Which is my only point is
if you're going to arrive at a negotiation a solution
in a negotiation US negotiation, to arrive at a solution
to a problem, you have to you have to know.

Speaker 1 (07:48):
What your opponent is thinking.

Speaker 7 (07:50):
You have to be and if he says he has
security concerns, you have to be aware of that and
you may disagree with it, but you have to listen
to that and then figure out a way to prove
that he shouldn't.

Speaker 4 (08:01):
Have But no, no, that is what he's thinking and
what he's saying. Like he said, he said, okay, NATO's
a threat. NATO has never been a threat to anyone.
They were defensive.

Speaker 9 (08:10):
Way.

Speaker 4 (08:10):
Maybe his reason is Number wants to rich area, so
he said, there you go. But so if he said
my goal is to get that rich area out of Ukraine,
that's what that's his reason. He could say there's a
Russian speaking people that needs saving, but that's not the reason.
The reason is he wants Ukraine and thinks it's an
illegitimate country.

Speaker 7 (08:28):
But I just think that I think that approaching this,
and I think Donald Trump has done a very good
job of this. President Trump has done a very good
job of this, of acknowledging that I may he may
not agree with Vladimir Putin on anything, but he's going
to listen to the arguments because he wants to negotiate
a solution to.

Speaker 4 (08:46):
It, right that is amenable and if there was real
things for Vladimir Putin to get, that's why the President
solved the other six And that's why he's having trouble
with this one. Yeah, because one side's not even being
honest about what they're looking for, and what they're looking
for is to absorb the country and put a puppet
there and we would never accept that.

Speaker 1 (09:06):
But he knows that, so he comes up with other reasons.

Speaker 4 (09:09):
Now we do have this news just in Secretary of
Home when Christinome announced that ICE has arrested Kilmore Albergo Garcia,
an MS thirteen gang member, human trafficker, wife beater, child predator,
and criminal illegal alien. He's arrested, He's in custody. He

(09:30):
is being processed for removal too. Uganda quote today ICE
law enforcement arrested him. She went on to say, President
Trump is not going to allow this illegal alien MS
thirteen gangster, human trafficker, domestic abuser, child predator to terrorize
American citizens any longer.

Speaker 7 (09:50):
So you know, you and I sat there and watched
this press conference with Obrego Garcia earlier this morning, and
I kept thinking, you know, can you imagine if you
went decided to go to France, or decided to go
to Switzerland, and you were going to break into the
country and you were going to live there for several

(10:11):
years illegally, and then they were going to deport you
because you were there illegally, and you had also apparently
committed some crimes that were pretty serious, both beating your
girlfriend and then also being in a drug and human
trafficking gang. And then when they decided to hold a
hearing to throw you out of the country, you decided

(10:33):
to hold a press conference. You couldn't do it in
French because you don't speak French. You've been there for
like ten years, but you don't speak French. So you
have to bring an interpreter who comes and translates your
English speech where your outrage, You're invoking family and God
and freedom, all this kind of stuff, and then the
interpreter has to translate it into French so that the
French audience can listen to what it is you have

(10:56):
to say.

Speaker 1 (10:57):
Could you imagine doing that? I couldn't see Brian kill
me doing no.

Speaker 4 (11:01):
And I think most of the American people see don't
understand who this guy is and why you'd have Senator
Van Hoyge.

Speaker 1 (11:09):
Why is this hero?

Speaker 5 (11:11):
Now?

Speaker 1 (11:11):
Why is he We're going to fight for your rights?

Speaker 4 (11:13):
And then Wes Moore says this about Kim Well, I
can't play the whole thing.

Speaker 1 (11:18):
I'm going to throw up in my mouth, but this
is this is him. Cut fifteen.

Speaker 10 (11:22):
What we know is that you know, and all we're
asking for is that the Constitution we follow on this.
The Constitution is very clear about how we deal with
these types of issues. And when we look at what's
happened in this situation, it's the president manipulating the fact
that we have a very broken immigration system.

Speaker 1 (11:38):
So okay, what's he talking about you?

Speaker 7 (11:41):
No, no, no, I totally agree with that. That the truncated
clip you just played. One agree with him that we
need to follow the constitution.

Speaker 1 (11:50):
And you know what we are.

Speaker 7 (11:51):
This is the constitution now and people like it in
front of least two judges. Yeah, they and they love
to say things like, oh, the immigration system is broken. Well, yeah, okay,
they're problems with the immigration system, but actually the immigration
system is actually very clear about this. You're not allowed
to be in the country illegally as an illegal, you're
not allowed to work illegally in the country as an illegal.

(12:12):
There are all kinds of Now, you may not like
the laws, but that doesn't mean that the system is broken,
And if you want to change the laws, then you can.

Speaker 1 (12:20):
Go and elect people to change the laws.

Speaker 7 (12:23):
The problem with our the problem with our broken I'm
doing air quotes immigration system is that you have a
lot of politicians who don't care about the Constitution and
don't care about the law, and they are deciding to
free lance and make it up.

Speaker 1 (12:39):
As they go along.

Speaker 7 (12:40):
Sentary cities as example, that violate all of the raw
laws all the Constitution, and they because they're upset about it,
because it's politically popular within the Democrat party for them
to do that. The problem for Democrats is it's becoming
less and less politically popular for them to do this.

Speaker 1 (12:57):
I'm gonna when we come back.

Speaker 4 (12:58):
I have a suggestion to to the pro what would
add to the president's immigration agenda which would really throw
off his critics. Stand by, we have the latest kill
albertgo Garcia. If you're looking to play pick up basketball
with him this weekend, if you're hoping to go have
a p if you invite him to your house from
Monday's barbecue, he's not going. He's going to be in

(13:20):
Uganda at Zoe rim Donnie's compound perhaps or at the Applebee's.

Speaker 1 (13:25):
Near the compound. They could live weights together. That would
be great.

Speaker 4 (13:33):
Say we're back Kilmore Arbraio Garcia is under arrest. He
was given a hero send off as he went into
an ice facility. He thought to get his orders and
go back to his family, but his family will have
an option to join him in Uganda. I imagine they
will say no, thank you. That's why we have email
and zoom. I'm pretty sure, Charlie hurd Us here, Charlie,

(13:56):
I have an idea. Oh good, ready, I can't wait
as much as we are cracking down illegal immigrants here,
I think we should work out a plan where those
people on green cards, then you normally have to wait
ten years, can wait five maybe h one b visas
to people doing it the right way, waiting in line

(14:16):
from Argentina and Brazil and Switzerland, whatever, those people coming
into our country the right way.

Speaker 1 (14:24):
Let's cut their paperwork.

Speaker 4 (14:26):
Let's cut that bureaucracy and speed up to the people
doing it the right way, because right now it is
too laborious to do it the right way. And now
that you've sealed the border, do you agree that we
can well, in lieu of doing comprehensive which is probably
never going to happen, can we start doing the other
stuff on the people who are following the rules?

Speaker 7 (14:49):
Well, and I think that's and you could even expand
that beyond the people who are doing it by the
rules and include the so called dreamers, that held up
that held up the diary records for decades or for
fifteen years.

Speaker 1 (15:04):
And I've always thought that, you know, the real tell.

Speaker 7 (15:08):
That Democrats don't actually want to solve this problem is
that when Donald Trump went to Democrats and said, I'll
make you a deal on dreamers, but you have to
fix the border, they didn't. They turned him down. Dick
Durbin was like, no, we don't want to do that
because they don't want to solve the problem. They love
the problem. The problem helps them politically until and this
has always been from the very beginning. If you cared

(15:34):
even about the people who weren't dreamers, these were young
children who were brought here by their.

Speaker 1 (15:38):
Parents who are illegal.

Speaker 7 (15:40):
Even if you cared about beyond that, you cared about
actual people that came across the border. If you care
about them, the single greatest thing you could do to
them is fix the border. Because as soon as you
fix the border, the contours of the entire debate changes.
And what we have found is that now that Donald
Trump has done this, I think that he's open to

(16:01):
absolutely anything, any sort of negotiation on.

Speaker 4 (16:05):
Those Here's where you will we are probably gonna disagree
with me, and I'm fine with it. Is that I
believe the hospitality workers, the meat packers, and the farmers
don't become citizens. But if they've been here, not over
the last four years, but they've been here and there's
nothing on their record, they get extended work visas. So
we don't destroy agriculture, hospitality and meat packers, for example, immediately.

(16:30):
I don't reward him with citizenship. You could say, pay
him a fine, but they don't have to evacuate.

Speaker 7 (16:36):
Well, that becomes a political question, and everything Donald Trump
is doing right now depends upon the economy being good
for the people that voted for him and people who
didn't vote for him, but the economy being really good.
And I think if Donald Trump looks at this and
sees that doing, you know, forcing those laws hurts the economy,
I think you're going to see him negotiating.

Speaker 4 (16:57):
Because a lot of the farmers voted for him, and
they're saying, seventy cent of my work force came.

Speaker 1 (17:01):
Here illegally and I've been it's a real problem. Charlie Hurt,
You're not a problem. Thank you everyone, Welcome back. Thanks
so much for listening.

Speaker 4 (17:14):
It was great to have Charlie hurt In here and
of course have the breaking news kill mar Abrado. Garcia
is going to be packed up and sent to afghan
Do you excuse me?

Speaker 1 (17:21):
Afghanistan? That would be nice. Uganda?

Speaker 4 (17:25):
Good luck with that, and he can maybe bring his
family if he wants. He was offered a deal where
he played guilty on two counts, one was human trafficking
and then sent to Costa Rica and he said, no, okay,
this is planed. Bay Mayor Scott Singer joined us sound
mayor of book ratone and he's also a chairman of
America First Policy Institute's Mayor's Council. Mayor Singer, welcome to

(17:48):
the bran kill me, JOEO Brian for having me. Hey,
mister mayor. First off, you've had a very interesting background.
I did not know that you've had quite a bit
of success on Jeopardy and Who Wants.

Speaker 1 (17:59):
To be a Millionaire?

Speaker 4 (18:01):
I mean, so, did you know you were capable of
excelling on both those syndicated shows.

Speaker 2 (18:07):
Royce loved trivia as a kid. I watched Jeopardy from
his kid I got it was fortunate enough to take
millionaire in during law school at helped pay for law school,
and then my dreams came true and I got to
tape Jeopardy and win. So a lot of fun, all right,
So it's having a lot of fun here with you.

Speaker 1 (18:20):
Absolutely, that's good point.

Speaker 4 (18:22):
But you're out there and you realized that we could
be about to be here in New York City about
to elect a Marxist, communist, socialist pick one proud to
want to redistribute wealth, and you want to redistribute New Yorkers.
You're saying, come one, come all to Boca Ratone.

Speaker 2 (18:39):
Absolutely, we've had a lot of success over decades and
especially since COVID, of attracting business businesses, job creators, and
high network individuals who want to come to our low tax,
low regulation, beautiful state and beautiful city. We've got the
lowest property tax rate of any full service city in Florida.
But I'm like the crazy ideas you're hearing in New
York that are going to drive away capital, increase the

(19:00):
marginal tax rate to seventeen percent. That's seventeen percent more
than paying Boca Ratone. We are streamlining efforts welcoming businesses
and creating a great quality of life where we invest
in public safety, infrastructure and so much more.

Speaker 4 (19:12):
Well, first off, we'll kind of response to what kind
of a response if you had from New Yorkers to date?
I mean, it seems like there's a lot of people
relocated during the pandemic.

Speaker 1 (19:21):
Is it still happening.

Speaker 2 (19:22):
It is still happening, and we're really focusing on corporate
executives and people looking to move businesses here. I don't
expect thousands of people moving to our beautiful city of
one hundred thousand. We're pretty well built out, but we
have plenty of office space to accommodate. And unlike other
cities that are shrinking their downtown footprint for office, we're
actually growing ours. We're working on a public private partnership
to three hundred thousand square feet of office right in

(19:43):
our downtown to go along with more than one hundred
and fifty that's already underway. So you've got plenty of
places for jobs. We expect people are moving and the
response has been strong.

Speaker 1 (19:51):
Brian, so he's pretty amazing too. And what in terms
of crime, what are you dealing with in Boca Retone.

Speaker 2 (19:57):
We've got tremendous public safety. Right we were at the
lowest crime rates we had at forty year lows about
six years ago, and they've only dropped since then. And
we've bucked the tide because we have one of the
highest starting salaries for police departments in the nation, because
we can attract and retain the best people understand this,
and we've invested more in public safety. That's why these

(20:18):
crazy ideas you're seeing in New York and other places
to replace police, sworn law enforcement officers with others are
going to increase crime there. We do the opposite. We've
staffed up our police department and we have the best
public safety.

Speaker 4 (20:30):
So you have these mayors now pushing back on a
possible National Guard presence when the crime says stats are
off the charts in DC as well as now could
be Chicago, and there's wherry in places like Baltimore, wherry
instead of saying, I thank you for the help. So
what about the mindset of leave me alone federal government.

(20:51):
You can understand that, But I think that Donald Trump's case,
he's getting impatient because they're not cracking down in these criminals.

Speaker 2 (20:59):
That's why I'm pro partner with other mayors on this
newly formed America First Policy Institute. Mayor's council because we're
focusing on governing the way, tying the issues you see
in Washington to Main Street and the governor. Excuse me,
they have a governor's council as well, but the governor's council,
the mayor's council, We're focused on what we can do
at our cities. I'm not worried about federal troops coming
to my city because we have great crime records, great crime,

(21:22):
low crime rates, and great public safety records. So you know,
maybe it's a different perspective. And yes, cities should be
able to govern wall to wall, but where cities are failing,
that's where you're having problems. And this is why this
discussion is happening in other places.

Speaker 4 (21:35):
I don't have to tell you about the illegal immigrant
driving a truck with a commercial license an eighteen wheel
are making a crazy U turn, killed three people from Florida.
They've extra diieded them because you're a lieutenant governor, showed
up in California to get them and brought them back.
And there's a petition of two million plus to say
he deserves leniency. But now, not only is he not

(21:56):
getting leniency in Florida, you guys have changed the.

Speaker 1 (21:59):
Rules, and how do you feel about it? Is?

Speaker 4 (22:00):
Then now every way station will be an investigation point
in Florida where we make sure that the person driving
has got a license and from this country and understands English.

Speaker 1 (22:10):
How do you feel about this?

Speaker 2 (22:12):
I think what we're really seeing it's credit to the president,
President Trump and the administration because what they've done has
been to see change of what happened four years ago.
We had millions of people without documentation coming in, crossing
the border without without without any reason or basis, and
then not meeting the basic qualifications. But that poorest border
created issues for us in the city level. Fentyl. The

(22:32):
Fentel epidemic is far worse than even the traffic epidemic
or the number of people killed every year on roadways,
and the poorest border allowed that to come in. With
President Trump reducing border crossings by more than ninety percent,
we've now solved the problem that went was just exacerbated.
And I appreciate Secretary Rubio's statement that we're you know,

(22:53):
and the administration that they're not going to be issuing
CDL licenses commercial driver's licenses to people without documentary anymore.
It's a real problem. You can't have this happening, and
so it affects us at the city level because we're
dealing with fentonyl on the streets, We're dealing with crimes,
We're dealing with people or injured in accidents. So I
think it's very important that we do all these things.

Speaker 4 (23:12):
A couple of things are going on too, as Jerry
Mannering madness is going on, they felt as though the
census was not giving an accurate description of what happened
in Florida and Texas, in particular, your populations increase about
five percent each since the twenty twenty census. With congressional
districts being divided up, Texas won in redistrict. They're about
to change and maybe make it easier for five more

(23:33):
Republicans to win.

Speaker 1 (23:34):
They've answered the same thing.

Speaker 4 (23:35):
It looks like they're on the path in California, and
I think Governor Ron Desanta says he's going to.

Speaker 1 (23:40):
Feel to do the same thing.

Speaker 4 (23:42):
I know you're a you don't necessarily have a say
in this, but you certainly have an opinion on this.

Speaker 1 (23:46):
How do you feel about it?

Speaker 2 (23:49):
I think it's important that it's several things First, there
were questions about the census and the after census review
that came after the Biden administration came in. They reviewed
it and saw that there were statistical eras. Virtually for Florida,
it may have denied us one more seat. That's an
issue they're going to have to dress going forward. Someone's
going to have to address the fact that we've had
a strategy by one party to increase headcount through perhaps

(24:12):
very lax or no immigration laws for the purpose of
redistricting for census. And that's something that I'll have to
get taken up after this cycle. But for now I
can understand why this is going on. We're going to
have a bumpy twenty twenty six cycle with states doing
mid century or mid decade redistricting. But it's important that
we get the numbers right more going forward for the census.

Speaker 4 (24:32):
So with the border sealed, and you know, there's so
many illegal immigrants that have been here that have not
broken any laws, have been here over ten years, what
is the What do you think we should do with
hospitality workers, maybe meat packers, people in the farming community.

(24:52):
What do we do with the illegals that have not
broken the law?

Speaker 1 (24:56):
Except for coming here illegally.

Speaker 4 (24:58):
Could is there a way for them to stay with
the ft if the agricultural community wants them to, if
the hospitality workers, many of which voted for Trump, said
they need the help.

Speaker 1 (25:09):
What are your thoughts about that?

Speaker 2 (25:11):
I think there are a big first the biggest challenge
which we're still addressing. I think President Trump has done
a great job in terms of sealing the border, but
we still had millions of people who came in over
the last four years that haven't been addressed. So you
first have to address those people. Then you have to
go up to the second cycle of people who are
here longer, some you know, in cases more than four years,
more than ten years, and I think you know the

(25:32):
reasonable policy we'ld be looking at the differences there. But
it's still we still have a lot of people who
just got here and the qualifications for which they got
protected status are going away, and I think we need
to deal with that first. From a mayor world's perspective,
it's more it's something that the federal government's got to address.
But I do see it's we got to get people

(25:52):
out who don't belong here now. And I appreciate the
administration's focus. As you mentioned at the start of this topic,
here people are committing violent crimes.

Speaker 4 (26:00):
So, Mayor Scott Singer, you mayor of Booker Raton. Now
you're Harvard grad. Have you ever thought about the education
and the exposure we're finding about about Ivy League schools
and the amount of international students there that there seemed
to be a priority because they pay full freight as
opposed to Americans who might have great grades. Have you

(26:20):
thought about with the president the president's current war against
your former university, as well as the one that's been
resolved with Columbia and Brown.

Speaker 2 (26:29):
Absolutely, and I appreciate what President Trump is doing there,
you know, as he joked to Will Sharp one day
he went there when Harvard was still good. I think
that would hopefully apply to me too, because Harvard's frankly
gone down. It has been heartbreaking for me just to
see at all of our campus. There's a lot of them,
not the state ones in Florida, mind you, how you've
had unchecked anti semitism and just frankly a loss of

(26:52):
moral compass where where the university president's being hauled before
the House committee and couldn't even stand up to violence statements,
talking about threats. You wouldn't have that in other places
in it you're seeing it in these academic bastions of learning.
It's shameful. I think the administration has done a great
job in holding universities accountable, and there's more accountability that

(27:13):
needs to happen because, frankly, there are very disturbing political
and policy views that are harmful to America. And frankly,
universities are there to educate our nation, to help provide
learning so we can inculcate the values that make America
special to the next generation of leaders. If we're having
thirty forty percent foreign students and these view views that

(27:35):
you know, death to America being talked about on campus openly,
that's a real problem for America. What is the point
of our tax support for these institutions. So I think
the administration is going to take even greater steps to
remedy the Title six violations that have gone on, and
I think that's important.

Speaker 1 (27:50):
So you didn't experience that when you were there.

Speaker 2 (27:53):
Fortunately, not we did not have the high percentage of
foreign students we have, and that doesn't necessar the foreign
students are welcome, but it's the right views, and you know,
people shouldn't be there to be anti American. They should
be there to want to be part of a community,
part of our academic community, part of an American community.
And yes, universities tended liberal there, but I think what

(28:15):
you're seeing over the last thirty years has just gone
far beyond the pale of what I encountered there. And
there weren't that many conservatives on campus then, but now
it's I think I've heard horror stories from recent Harvard
graduates and students.

Speaker 4 (28:27):
And now your message to businesses, you got off the
space available, the climate's great, the attitude's excellent, and you say,
come one, come all while you still can, while your
property values are still worth something before this mayor wins
in New York City.

Speaker 1 (28:42):
Is that your message? It is?

Speaker 2 (28:44):
And also you know there have been crazy ideas that
have been proposed by this candidate, even taking potentially you know,
private housing for public use. People should be worried there
will be a flight of capital. I think people are
already moving and I wouldn't want to wait if I
were in New York Talk November. I lived in New York.
I love New York City. It's a shame what it
may turn into. And already as you've seen the increase

(29:06):
in crime and petty crime on the street where you
had the vendors with their knockoff bags on Fifth Avenue
like I saw in the eighties and you don't you know,
didn't see for the last twenty years, and they're back.
I moved in twenty eleven from New York. It was
the best move possible for our family. Proud to raise
our family here, but build businesses, and we are focused
on this. It's not just New Yorkers who are coming here,

(29:26):
people from Chicago, California. We had a spate of media
happening in early July. We launched a website and a
billboard in Times Square and wide at Boca dot com,
and we've gotten thousands of hits there from multiple states
about people moving businesses to Boca Ratone. Because we are
a low tax, pro business climate. We've had more than
twenty streamlining initiatives here. We've got tech, we've got medtech, info, tech,

(29:49):
financial services. We've got a strong business base with more
than forty publicly traded corporate headquarters and fourteen thousand businesses.
So people are coming here and we want more.

Speaker 1 (29:58):
What's next for you?

Speaker 2 (30:00):
I've got seven months to continue serving as mayor. We're working,
as I mentioned, on a public private partnership that I
think can be transformative to our downtown. Eager to get
that finished. And I love public service. I'm ter term
limited as mayor, but never rule out an opportunity to
continue serving. I love public service.

Speaker 4 (30:16):
And obviously really good at it. Mayor Scott Singer, thanks
so much.

Speaker 2 (30:20):
Thank you so much.

Speaker 11 (30:26):
Are the Russians stringing President Trump along? No, not at all,
Chris sin I think the Russians have made significant concessions
to President Trump. For the first time in three and
a half years of this conflict. They've actually been willing
to be flexible on some of their core demands.

Speaker 9 (30:41):
They've talked about what would be necessary to end the war.

Speaker 11 (30:44):
Of course, they haven't been completely there yet or the
war would be over. But we're engaging in this diplomatic
process in good faith. We are trying to negotiate as
much as we can with both the Russians and the
Ukrainians to find the middle ground to stop the.

Speaker 4 (30:58):
Killing that was spin. The Russians have not given anything.
It seemed like they were going to, but they're not,
and I think that's important.

Speaker 1 (31:08):
I mean, he's in a situation.

Speaker 4 (31:10):
Where he wants to present a certain air, a certain perspective,
but the money perspective is a lot different from the
weekend perspective. Victor Davis Hansen joined US now Senior Fellow
in Military History at the Hoover Institute. His book is
now updated. It's called The End of Everything. Victor, Welcome
back to.

Speaker 1 (31:27):
The Brian Kill. Michelle, thank you your thoughts about jd Well.

Speaker 12 (31:32):
I mean, Russia has seventy six percent of most of
the provinces that they wanted, but the twenty five percent
are still huge territories, and the Ukrainians have lost a
lot of people, so they're not willing to give up
that territory, and they're killing or wounding three to four
Russians for everyone they lose. But Russia's done their terrible

(31:53):
arithmetic and thinks that now, for the first time in
over three years, they're making more progress, and they'll that
Ukraine will run out of manpower, and that's the real question, manpower,
not your munitions. They'll run out of manpower before Russia does,
so then the Allies have to come up with some
kind of strategy because it looks like at the present rate,

(32:15):
Russia will eventually in a year or two, and this
is going to be longer than World War Two. If
it doesn't stop, they'll grind Ukraine down. So Ukraine needs
either a negotiated settlement like Finland in nineteen thirty nine
or forty, or it needs massive inputs of new munitions
and manpower. And they've lost about twelve million people have

(32:36):
left the country, so they're down to below thirty million people.
And so that's where we are. It's a deadlock. And
I think there was a better time to negotiate in
twenty twenty four, when Russia was still stalled and was
losing a lot more than they are now. But now
Putin thinks that he's got the momentum. I don't know

(32:58):
whether he does or not, but that's what his op
writing principle is. So to your question, are we being played,
I don't know. I played is the right word. But
he's not eager to make a settlement because he thinks
time for a while at least is on his side.

Speaker 4 (33:11):
So in the other perspective is you know he's running
out of guys. You know he borrored North Korea guys.
He's using North Koreans now in factories. He's going through
Africa trying to get workers. If these reports are true.
I don't have a person in Russia. But most of
his stuff is unrefuted, and he's running out of people
because he doesn't draft a certain type of people.

Speaker 9 (33:31):
He doesn't, he doesn't. That's a good point.

Speaker 12 (33:34):
But the problem again is that Ukraine's now down to
thirty million, and Russia can draw on a pool of
one hundred and forty five million. So even though he's
down that it's not an absolute it's a relative problem.
And he's not fighting China or he's not fighting India.
He's fighting Ukraine. And that's the problem, and it's not
really reality, Brian, it's his perception. I think part of

(33:57):
the problem is he thinks that this was a disease
asked for a stupid move, which it was, and he's looking.
He already had CRIMEA, he already had the Donbas border lines.
They weren't going to go into NATO. There was no
reason to invade, except he thought he could get away
with it under Biden, as he had you know in
Georgia and Mosatia and under Obama in twenty fourteen, and

(34:19):
now he has to explain to the oligarchic class and
the military aparat that what he did was worth it
and that he's got enough territory to justify which some
people think is a million and a half dead, wounded, missing,
or captives. And he apparently thinks he doesn't have enough
territory to go back to. I know he's a dictator,

(34:39):
but all dictators report to something, and that's usually the
oligarchic or military hierarchy. And I think he thinks that
I have to get this seventy six percent of what
I invaded.

Speaker 9 (34:52):
I've got to get the whole thing.

Speaker 12 (34:53):
And of course Ukraine is not going to give him that,
and that's where we are in this dead law.

Speaker 4 (34:57):
But they also don't want They also don't want international
forces on the ground. But when they left Monday, excuse me,
Friday and Alaska, they thought that they were open to
a international security force. And then Lavrov made it clear
in a series of interviews, including one with NBC yesterday,
that he's they're not into that. They said, if for

(35:18):
a Russia would have to be part of any peacekeeping force.
Obviously that's last.

Speaker 9 (35:23):
Not going to happen.

Speaker 12 (35:23):
I think they're worried most of all, not about the
Europeans on the ground. I doubt very except for a
few Eastern European countries and the new members, I doubt
that Europeans are going to be very deterrent on the ground.
But the point that they're worried about is coming along
with that promise is US air support. And we saw
what happened in the Balkans. US air support was definitive.

(35:47):
And one thing the United States is pre eminent. It's
not going into places like Fallujah and fighting door to door,
but if you're in an air campaign, it's the best
air force in history. So that's what they don't want.
They do not want europe a small European deterrent force
backed up by US air power, and that's our only.

(36:07):
The other thing, very quickly is that they're betting that
Trump won't use a secondary boycott because to do so
won't just affect you know, Iran or North Korea, but India,
which is now sort of dissing itself from US and China,
and Trump has been very careful not to mention China
and India as a package because you're talking about three

(36:30):
billion people and you put a secondary boycott on them,
and right before the midterms, it could harm the US economy.
So but yet he knows that's the only thing that
will really hurt Putin, and yet it would hurt our
economy as well.

Speaker 9 (36:44):
So that's that's the kind of the dilemma that he's in.

Speaker 4 (36:47):
You got Turkey and Brazil, that would be a nice
way to ramp it up. So that would be three
and already feeling the price of paying the price over
in India.

Speaker 1 (36:56):
So let's talk. David Petrays was on yesterday.

Speaker 4 (36:58):
Did you see the Wall Street Journal story that said
that it seems as though we're slow. We're told in
the spring, we told Ukraine do not use the attackers
to strike Russia. In Russia they quietly block Ukraine's long
range missile strikes, and then Trump the next day put
out excuse me the day prior said this on true

(37:19):
social it is very hard, if not impossible, to win
a war without attacking Innovader's country. It's like a great
team in sports that has fantastic defense, but it's not
allowed to play offense.

Speaker 1 (37:29):
Well, then the Wall Street Journal story.

Speaker 4 (37:30):
Comes out revealing this is this a situation where the
Pentagon is doing a different something different than the President once.

Speaker 12 (37:37):
I don't know, but I think there's a feeling in
the White House and the Pentagon that, according.

Speaker 9 (37:43):
To the old Cold War rules, it's very.

Speaker 12 (37:46):
Dangerous in a proxy war to hit the home mount
that's justified of your adversary. When Cuba was a proxy
for the Soviet Union on us and Khrushchev decided to
use that proxy to aim missiles at our homeland, we
almost went to Defcon one to stop it, and we
removed missiles from Turkey as part of the compromise. So

(38:07):
in the Cold War, we could have really won the
Vietnam War had we had unlimited bombing from the very
beginning and hit all of the apparatus in Hanoi.

Speaker 9 (38:16):
And we couldn't do it. We couldn't bomb Hyphoon.

Speaker 12 (38:18):
Because we were afraid that we would trigger a Soviet
or a Chinese invasion. And we had the same problem
in Korea. So I think that institutional thinking in the
Pentagon and even among the especially among the Maga people
is it's militarily justified, and it's the only way to
win the war is to make Russia pay. But you're

(38:40):
using a proxy to hurt your global rival. And there
is a long history that that gets into some dangerous territory,
and I think that's what's that's the hesitation. I don't
know whether it's justified or not. I know, in military terms,
if you want to win the war, you're going to
have to hit supply and logistical capability inside Russian I

(39:01):
also know, according to the Cold War protocols, when you
do that in a proxy war, it gets kind of sticky.

Speaker 1 (39:08):
Here's what General David Petraea said.

Speaker 4 (39:10):
So that was couched to him about the Wall Street
General Report and the President's post cut fourteen.

Speaker 13 (39:16):
That was exactly what the Biden administration did in the past.
They were overly sensitive, endlessly about how Russia might react
to something that they provide Ukraine, and they were restricting
the use of the Army Tech Dole missile system and others.
And so I hope that that will get a review
in the White House and therefore a change in the Pentagon.

Speaker 1 (39:34):
I mean, think about it.

Speaker 4 (39:35):
Joe Biden gave them enough to not lose, but to
make sure they didn't win. Remember no Hi, Mars got
Hi Mar's no patriots, you got patriots, No F sixteen's,
got F sixteens, No M ONEA one tanks, got M
one A one tanks, and then attack THEMS with the
last thing. Imagine if he just had a coherent policy
to begin with.

Speaker 12 (39:54):
Yeah, but the thing is, in any other war this,
given enough to win, but give enough to sustain the effort,
but not to win would be suicidal. But we have
never done this before. We've never had a proxy war
on the doorstep of Russia before. We've had it in Vietnam,

(40:15):
We've had it in Korea. And if you go back
and look at those wars, they could have been won
very easily. Macarthury wanted to bomb all of the Chinese
depots across the Manchurian border. He wanted to shoot down
every Russian pilot in Vietnam. We knew that Russians were
unloading stuff at Haiphong that we could have destroyed, but
we didn't do it. And I don't know when General

(40:37):
Petrea says that, whether he's thinking that that was a
mistake in the past or that that was communism and
now Russia is a different bird than the Soviet system.
And I'm not critiquing it, Brian, I'm just saying that
it's deeply ingrained in American foreign policy over eighty years
in the post war order that when you're in a
proxy war with a nuclear power that's your global rival,

(41:00):
and they keep threatening to retaliate and ninety nine percent
of their threats are empty, you don't know in that
type of threat what the one percent is.

Speaker 9 (41:10):
I think they're not going to do anything.

Speaker 12 (41:12):
I think if you hit certain targets and you avoided
their strategic bases, or you didn't go after their nuclear facilities, they.

Speaker 9 (41:18):
Wouldn't do anything. But I'm not sure of that.

Speaker 12 (41:21):
And the problem is they have six thousand deliverable nuclear
weapons and they and the other problem is the borders
of Ukraine, the way they look at it, are so fluid.
I mean, until nineteen thirty nine, all of western Ukraine
was Roman Catholic Polish speaking, and only the Ribentrov Molotov

(41:42):
pak ethnically cleansed the Poles, and Stalin never gave it up.
He boke his promises and he gave Poland territory in
East Prussian Pomerania for the new Poland. And then Khrushchev
then said, while we're going to give Ukraine autonomy in
the fifties because they have a nationalist movement.

Speaker 9 (41:58):
And he changed the border.

Speaker 12 (42:00):
So Crimea was an independent country in nineteen ninety one,
ninety two, and ninety three, and Russia was going to
steal it and Ukraine got it first. So and I'm
not I'm not at all defending the Russians. I'm just
saying that when we look at this, the borders are
so they're like the Balkans. It's got the same problems

(42:20):
of going in and getting rid of Melosovich. And we
we had problems there Russia at one point, remember.

Speaker 9 (42:28):
We were told that they we stopped our.

Speaker 12 (42:31):
NATO commander from storming an airfield and we said, you
want to start World War three? And that's what we
stopped them.

Speaker 9 (42:39):
It was a very tricky operation.

Speaker 1 (42:42):
Right victory.

Speaker 4 (42:43):
I guess the thing that I factor in is I
don't think for a second the Russians are done here.
So no matter how if Ukraine stops right now and
they get the Dambos region, in five years we're going
to be hearing about unrest in Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, problems
with elections a Russian candidates is successful.

Speaker 1 (43:03):
The Russians were called in by Russian.

Speaker 4 (43:05):
Speaking people to take part of one of those Baltic nations,
and they're going to begin to take in.

Speaker 1 (43:12):
The rest of Georgia.

Speaker 4 (43:14):
Their goal is to gradually get the water so hot
it boils, and NATO is going to say, Wow, how
the hell did they reconstruct the Soviet Union? And we're
going to be mad at this generation for allowing it
to happen. Am I wrong to play this out that way?

Speaker 12 (43:32):
You're wrong if nothing changes. But if NATO goes up
to five percent, and they've now got the best artillery
per capital in the world with the Fins and the
Swedish avionics industry is as good as ours.

Speaker 9 (43:48):
Smaller, but we're NATO.

Speaker 12 (43:49):
If they go up to five percent and you've got
the best army in Europe, the Ukrainians, they are the
best army and the largest now except for Turkey, then
you do have a deterrent. You can have a DMZ
sort of like we've seen with North Korea and it'll
be just as tense. And if you guarantee US air power,
we'll protect the integrity of Ukraine. I think you can
deter putin. There was a very interesting comment very quickly

(44:13):
at that Many summit last Monday when the Finnish President
Alexander Stoop said, you know, we can solve this problem.

Speaker 9 (44:22):
We did it in Finland.

Speaker 12 (44:23):
And what he was talking about was nineteen thirty nine
and forty the same thing happened. Stalin, in league with Hitler,
said we want all of Finland and they said no,
and then they said, well, we'll take what we can get,
and there was a war they lost to half a
million people and Mannerheim and the Finns stopped them, and
then they negotiated and they gave them ten percent of

(44:43):
the territory and Stalin said to himself, I'll never want
to go into Finland again. It was such a blood
bath for this, and that's in Finland was sort of
like Austria or Switzerland for the next eighty years. And
I think that's what the Finnish president was saying, that
if Ukraine makes it so bad for Russia to come in,

(45:04):
but it gives territorial concessions, maybe what we have now
a DMZ right where of battle sees fire line and
then we give them air support. I don't think Putin
will want to do this again. I think that's the
thinking in Washington.

Speaker 4 (45:17):
And here's what Alexander Stubb told me on Sunday Night,
Cut nine.

Speaker 8 (45:25):
I always remind the president that the only thing that
President Putin understands is power, and the only person that
he listens to is Trump, and the only person that
he's afraid of is Trump. So I'm sure that the
President is thinking hardh strategically on what to do next.

Speaker 1 (45:41):
I think he's right, Yeah, I do.

Speaker 12 (45:43):
I think he's right, And I think the reason that
he said that is that, to be frank, you and I,
Brian don't know what Trump's going to do. He's a
mercurial person and if he gets fed up with Putin,
which he may be doing, and Putin thinks there was
a reason and they had it all wrong. He came
over here and his whole point was to play Kate

(46:05):
Donald Trump and all that gibberish about all of the
ancient history and all that. It was basically saying, please
do not have a secondary boycott, Please do not give weapons,
and we will give grudgingly marginal concessions over a year
or two of negotiations. Why we try to gain traction
on the battlefield. That's what he was doing. And Trump,

(46:25):
you know, he said, I go home to Millennia and
I say I got a deal, and she says, no,
you don't. They've killed somebody today. So the reason this
war has gone on is there was no deterrence.

Speaker 1 (46:38):
I hear you.

Speaker 4 (46:39):
The End of Everything has been updated. It's excellent book.
Victor Davis Hantson, always fantastic, Thanks.

Speaker 9 (46:44):
So much, Thank you, Brian.

Speaker 3 (46:50):
You know, the city of Chicago does not need a
military occupied state.

Speaker 5 (46:57):
That is, that's not who we are.

Speaker 3 (46:59):
And I commend the work of Mayor Bass, my colleague,
and you know all the folks in Los Angeles who
stood up and fought, you know, against this, you know, authoritarianism.
Here's the bottom line. They don't have police power. There's
nothing they can do. You know, these are federal troops.
They do not go through the training that our police
officers go through, so they cannot even enact police authority.

Speaker 4 (47:23):
They also know how to handle unrest riots if they've
been through Afghanistan, Iraq, they go through that whole all
that training, and they are there that back up, just
like the border, back up, the border patrol, back up
the cops. Should things get out of control, they'll be there,
but it'll freeze up cops to go into areas that
they just didn't have the numbers to do. And also
you go sometimes some of the call times are thirty minutes.

Speaker 1 (47:45):
I was in New Orleans last week.

Speaker 4 (47:47):
They were saying that most nine to one one calls,
it looks like crime is going down because people have
given up on call nine to one one.

Speaker 1 (47:53):
It takes the earliest thirty minutes after.

Speaker 4 (47:55):
Call for anybody to show up, and a lot of
times they say we just don't have people. Can you
imagine that calling nine one one and being told we
don't have people. But then it goes down as nobody
lists a crime because it doesn't register, You don't write
anything up. So Pat Ryder, National County Police Commissioner joined
US now commissioner.

Speaker 5 (48:14):
Welcome, Welcome, good morning, Brian. Thanks for having me.

Speaker 4 (48:17):
When they got rid of cash, bell came on, you
contacted me. You came into studio a bunch of times
and you said, Brian, you do not understand how bad
this is. When this goes if this goes through, it
is going to be terrible. Tell everyone what passed and
what the ramifications were.

Speaker 14 (48:35):
So in January twenty twenty, they came out with the
Cash's baill.

Speaker 5 (48:39):
They called the Justice reform.

Speaker 14 (48:41):
Not only was it Cash's Bail, it was raised the
age for the juvenile that we don't charge them. It
was also discovery that everything's got to be turned over.
But what it did in Cash's Bill, it took the
decision making away from the judge and it said.

Speaker 5 (48:54):
Here's the law.

Speaker 14 (48:55):
If it is a non violent felony and any misdemeanor,
you're gonna let them out with no bail. You're not
required to keep bailing.

Speaker 5 (49:02):
Now.

Speaker 14 (49:03):
Bill was always for the purpose of bail was to
make sure that people show back to court. These guys
didn't come back to court, and that's why we had
to go out and created more warrants that we had
to go chase them down the road later on.

Speaker 5 (49:13):
But by them creating a revolving door.

Speaker 14 (49:17):
Criminals that would go out commit a crime know that
if they got caught, they're only going to get a
ticket and they go back and commit another crime until
they finally get into the justice system forty five days later,
which ended up being months later because then COVID came
into place, and then we.

Speaker 5 (49:33):
Also had the George Floyd and Black Lives Matter.

Speaker 14 (49:37):
Issues that were going on, so things when they look
at numbers, and they say crime is starting to go down,
not up.

Speaker 5 (49:44):
They're not telling the true story.

Speaker 14 (49:45):
If you look at twenty twenty or twenty twenty one, yeah,
you're comparing it to where nobody was on the streets.
There is no crime crime plummeted in those two years.
In twenty twenty two, crime crime skyrocketed because we came
out of the the pandemic.

Speaker 5 (50:01):
We were still dealing with the fallout from George Floyd.

Speaker 14 (50:05):
We were still dealing with them with the Cast's ball system,
and nobody was going That's when crime numbers went up.
Now they're starting to see it go down in twenty three,
twenty four, and that's only because you had such a
high number in twenty twenty two, and that's after Castless fail.

Speaker 4 (50:21):
You also have a discovery, right, isn't there a certain
window when it comes to discovery.

Speaker 1 (50:25):
You got to put that case together rapidly. If you
don't have it, it falls apart.

Speaker 14 (50:29):
What used to be you thirty days before trial you
turn everything over the defense. Now it's fourteen days after arrest.
You got to turn everything over. Any video that's out there,
any piece of paperwork that's here, any kind of interview,
that was done. Everything must be in the defense hands
in fourteen days, unless it's a murder, then they let
you go out to twenty one days.

Speaker 5 (50:49):
And there's some extensions.

Speaker 14 (50:51):
But you're putting the again, putting the onus back on
law enforcement. So we're now responsible to do all these things.
And they were also mandates that were on fund funded,
so now government has to pay for all these people
to turn all this information over.

Speaker 1 (51:05):
This is what people in support of this say.

Speaker 4 (51:07):
They come out and they say, look, just beget If
you're a white collar criminal and you commit a horrendous crime,
you have the money to bail yourself out. If you're
somebody who's on welfare and you commit a crime, you
do the same crime, you can't bail yourself out. So
let's get rid of cash bailed. Let's make a cash list.
What's wrong with that?

Speaker 14 (51:27):
So I'll give you I'll be the first one to
make the argument for them saying that a rich kid
shouldn't get out of a poor kid. I agree that,
but here's that's not what this is about. This is
about the crime they committed. If the crime is a
serious crime, you should at least have the process to
hit the person with bail to make sure they come back.
We have victims that we work for. They're the people

(51:49):
who we should be defending, not the bad guy. So
we're letting that again revolving door occur, and again if
they have the money that they don't have the money.
It should be about what the crime is. The judge
should be able to make the decision. It says, this
is the fourth time this kid's been in here for shoplifting.
You know what, you need to stay thirty days. Let's
finally send the message to this guy that he's gonna

(52:11):
stay in here and if you come back again, we'll
pitch you again.

Speaker 4 (52:13):
What about the downgrading of charges in order to fit
the criteria to be eligible for cashless bail.

Speaker 14 (52:19):
Yep, So everybody has an ECB system. That's the early
case assessment. And in many of these democratic areas where
again like New York City, they would go into the
ECB system and then knock the charges down at ECAB,
not going for the more aggressive charge, they'd go for
the lesser charge. Even though we had the problem cause
to make the arrest on this charge, they would lower

(52:40):
the charge to make it fit. So there was bailing
out the door.

Speaker 4 (52:44):
So the President of the United States is signing today
an executive order ending cashless bail, and if you do
not listen to him and abide by it, Pam Bonni
is going to make sure those cities and jurisdictions that
do this will not receive federal funding. Of course, the
response to be, I'm going to sue, But what does
this do for you?

Speaker 14 (53:04):
It gives the cops that that sense of that we're
being supported again.

Speaker 5 (53:08):
Right, So we got beat up for the last three
four years.

Speaker 14 (53:11):
You know in this county kind of executive Bruce Blakeman
stands for the men and women who wear the uniform.
He's a strong supporter. So we're not losing on morale
from this side of it. But the law sometimes does
knock guys down. Why am I bothering locking this kid up?
He's only going to get out anyhow. So now that
it's coming from that federal level that President President Trump

(53:34):
is putting down, it's showing us that we're getting support
across the nation that hey, guys, we got you, We're
going to back you up.

Speaker 5 (53:42):
This is what we.

Speaker 14 (53:43):
Need to do to make sure the criminals stop doing
the acts that they're doing. If there is no punishment.
Why why would I stop. I'll just keep doing it.

Speaker 1 (53:54):
Do you think so? Do you think there will help?

Speaker 4 (53:55):
An executive order will help, will ripple down to your level.

Speaker 5 (54:00):
And if you listen, you and I know both.

Speaker 14 (54:01):
It will get bogged down in lawsuits and everything else
before it finally gets through and comes out. But it
definitely gives the judges the power back to hold somebody,
not worried about that they're going to have the fallout
if they let somebody out because the law says I
have to let you out.

Speaker 4 (54:18):
So I got to ask you if you do not
have a problem in Nasau County, But New York City does,
and so does Chicago, so is Philadelphia, so does Memphis, Tennessee, Baltimore, Maryland.
Even if the numbers are legitimately going down, they're still
not acceptable. When the National Guard shows up, they can't
act like cops. Haven't been trained like cops. So what

(54:39):
kind of an asset is a National Guard? Should you
be in an emergency type situation where you're trying to
do everything possible to stamp down crime, that.

Speaker 5 (54:47):
Perception over reality.

Speaker 14 (54:49):
Like Bruce Blakeman is big on making sure that we
are seeing out there people know where there to make
them have that comfort level when they go shopping and stuff.
If you are not comfortable to war got your door
like in Washington, DC, and you put the National Guard out, you.

Speaker 5 (55:04):
Bring the comfort level back. You've beating the perception that
I'm safe.

Speaker 14 (55:07):
They may not have the powers of law enforcement because
they are not certified law enforcement offices in that state,
but they have the power of the federal government to
stop somebody, like any one of us have to do,
from getting their butt kicked in on the corner by
somebody robbing them.

Speaker 5 (55:23):
They'll step in and they'll stop that, just like.

Speaker 1 (55:25):
A throw out throw out.

Speaker 4 (55:27):
So when they're armed, at what point can they put
their hands on somebody?

Speaker 1 (55:31):
For example?

Speaker 4 (55:32):
You know, do they act like a civilian? So for example,
if there's two cops there and that there's ten guys
are rushing two cops. If I'm in Camoufage, I'm a
National guardsman, what can I do?

Speaker 14 (55:44):
You You got to know that they're gonna indemnifire, They're
gonna back you up.

Speaker 5 (55:47):
So the president is going to back his military force up.

Speaker 14 (55:51):
You're gonna go out there and you're gonna intervene stopping
those two cops from getting hurt. And if you have
to roll around with this subject and it gets nasty,
well you got to know that the government's going to
back you up. They know that this guy Donald Trump
is going to back them up.

Speaker 5 (56:05):
You know.

Speaker 14 (56:05):
That's like our cops here in Nasa County. We know
Bruce Blakeman will back.

Speaker 1 (56:09):
You up, but your governor won't. But your governor won't.

Speaker 14 (56:12):
One hundred percent. And that's a problem. And that's why
we got to know that there are people supporting us
out there and we're giving back the streets to the people,
not to the bad guys.

Speaker 5 (56:23):
During COVID, we lost it. We lost it big time.

Speaker 4 (56:27):
So the other thing is how do you coordinate. For example,
the problematic areas in Washington, DC. Everybody knows them, but
people are complaining that the National Guard are around the
monuments in the areas.

Speaker 1 (56:39):
That don't see a lot of crime.

Speaker 4 (56:41):
Is that because the cops can now push out to
those problematic areas.

Speaker 5 (56:46):
So if I got my.

Speaker 14 (56:47):
Cop and I got to guard this monument, I put
four cops over there. I don't have four cops that
are responding to that nine to one one call. I
don't have four cops that are walking that shopping mall
to protect you from somebody stealing us, somebody trying to
rob you. Now it's going to help add more bodies
to patrol to answer the nine one one calls and
assist them while these national guards or military people are

(57:10):
going to guard those structures and infrastructure that I can
move my bodies to answer calls of service.

Speaker 5 (57:16):
They're not trained, but.

Speaker 14 (57:17):
They know rules of engagement better than anybody, and they
know the use of force better than anybody.

Speaker 4 (57:21):
And so now that this executive order passed, what are
you telling your men and women in uniform today in
Nassau County, Long Island, which for the last few years
has been the safest county in the country.

Speaker 14 (57:33):
We will continue to work towards striving to be the
safest county. We continue to keep our model of policing up.
Knowing that the government has your back is a big boost.
It's a big hey. Go out there and get them.
Let me patch you on the back.

Speaker 1 (57:46):
And we're I'm gonna make sure that they're gonna have bail.
They got to post bail, right.

Speaker 5 (57:50):
That's right.

Speaker 14 (57:50):
Bad guys will stay where they're supposed to stay in jail.

Speaker 1 (57:53):
Well and when do you find out if you're the
safest county again?

Speaker 5 (57:56):
So we should have found out this month. We're being
told that not doing it this year.

Speaker 14 (58:02):
Maybe that's because it's coming from a certain side of
the media, but I will tell you this, Bruce Blakeman's
Safest County America twenty twenty three, twenty twenty four, we
lowered crime by nine percent, so it looks like we
were going to win it again. And then this year
we down another fifteen percent, so we continue to be
the safest county in America.

Speaker 4 (58:21):
So the President of the United States is really doubting
that the crime numbers are going down in places like
Washington and Baltimore, and he wants an investigation into it.
Do you some of these statistics they say just do
not make sense, some of which, as I mentioned before,
from the outside of perspective.

Speaker 1 (58:38):
If I don't call.

Speaker 4 (58:39):
Nine one one because you guys never come, or the
nine one one operator says I can't get there for
forty minutes, that's not a crime that's reported.

Speaker 1 (58:48):
It becomes something we're dealing with alone. Do we have
to factor things like this into the final stats.

Speaker 14 (58:55):
Our biggest partner in our business is our communities. If
we lose the faith of our community need to call
nine one one, We've lost. You can't do that, And
so that's what's happening. People stop calling nine one one
because nothing they know, nothing's going to happen. By the
time they're getting there, the bad guy's already gone. So
why involve yourself?

Speaker 5 (59:12):
Right? They need to know that.

Speaker 14 (59:14):
They're also supported by the men and women of law force,
and in NASA.

Speaker 5 (59:17):
County they are.

Speaker 14 (59:18):
And now with the resources being available to respond in
Washington and areas like that, they will start to build
up their support again.

Speaker 1 (59:26):
All right, do you believe the numbers?

Speaker 4 (59:28):
When you guys going cop to cop, commissioner to commissioner.
When you see numbers, you guys pick up the phone
like NFL coaches and you know what's going on. Right,
So how are you supposed to believe the numbers?

Speaker 5 (59:39):
Our daily response is to the numbers.

Speaker 14 (59:41):
That's intelligence led policing, effective and efficient use of resources
driven by data.

Speaker 5 (59:45):
If you look at the numbers, what am I comparing
them to?

Speaker 14 (59:49):
If I'm comparing them to last year and there's a
slight decrease, well that's good, you're doing better than you
did last year. But was last year a total disaster
because you failed from the year before, which was bail reform.
They're not doing it. They're looking comparing it to twenty nineteen.
Well that wasn't when Castle's bail was here. Compared it
to twenty twenty three, when the world blew up. We
were the safest county in America. We're being compared to

(01:00:10):
the entire United States and we're getting back a response
the city to safest county. That's a true number. But
guess what those numbers for me were very high. They
were very high, just like everybody else in the country.
Because it's after Castle's bail.

Speaker 5 (01:00:23):
Go back before it.

Speaker 14 (01:00:24):
I'll go back during it and tell me where you are.

Speaker 1 (01:00:26):
All right.

Speaker 4 (01:00:27):
Commissioner pat Ridy is doing a great job in Nassau County,
New York as a police commissioner, and just found out
that the President's signed the executive order ending cashless bail.
Let the legal battle begin, but you guys have that
until further notice.

Speaker 1 (01:00:39):
Thanks so much, Commissioner.

Speaker 5 (01:00:41):
Thank you, Brian. Great to talk