media escalation with a panel of guests to the extent of the nuclear dr. now the russian federation costs for retaliation. where is hot spot edge equip and in the event, the existence of the very existence of the russian for the russian. these are on the line. yes. it is a dangerous step on your street. those f 16 might not be technologically up to par, but every one is agreeing on the fact that they can carry a nuclear weapons and we're getting was originally him again in j of uh, was, seems to be encouraged. my uh, its masters in washington to uh, basically double down uh and do whatever it takes to somehow keep, uh, the city is going there is no, it talks of, uh, uh, negotiation or taking into account the, the fact that the ukrainian military capabilities are dwindling fast and so we are somewhat witnessing a and a lot of people have said it's so a kind of

a sleep walking process to what could be uh i do to exchange it's not out of the realm of possibility. i don't think we are so close to this. um, what danger? we need to understand why the west is reacting in this way. it is because russia is we winning, called the nato, and the west. well, off to dining, conducting and carrying out the war from room stay in germany, 50 nations, all that. and they know, managing the west loans to involve the pass code because it seems the danger of russians advance. i don't think we're approaching the 3rd world war. however, i think we're in desperate in desperation times they don't have a strategy. they, they, they realize that the ukraine has failed in west western observers. the minutes. so

i, and i think that they are groping at straws now to try to figure out some of the fact that the russians have not been much more assertive. until now. there's probably given the west a little bit of a sense. well, maybe ukraine does. in fact, have a chance, but, but russia is waiting for, it seems to me, now it does show that if russia doesn't react more harshly, then we'll soon see the f sixteens where the ukranian pilots, all train. everybody in that region knows that a work against them, not even one tactical nuke would, would spread radiation all over the place, and then just they can find it would affect everybody. and that in itself should be same maximum deterrence. well that, so we've had time to squeeze in, but you can head over to our website all comfortable on all the stories we've been covering plenty since the still not the

the hello and welcome to crossed. i bullhorn time peter labelle here. we discussed some real news of the escalation, louder nato inches closer to war with russia in a desperate attempt to salvage its failing ukraine. project also will be american people, a left, a convicted felon president. to discuss these issues and more, i'm joined by my guess george, send me while we in budapest, he's a pod counselor at the goggle, which can be found on youtube and locals and americans. we have martin jay, he is an award winning journalist and commentator, gentleman cross up rules and the fact that means you can jump any time you want. and i always appreciate it. it's kicked us off with george in budapest. you know, george, we've heard we have this mean record regarding the ukraine. it's been persistent

over the last few months. is that you claim is on its last legs. we keep hearing that and, but we also see nato escalating. the problem is here is this escalation is not directed and i'm talking about where it's coming from, the, the british, the french, the germans, etc, particularly the americans. and this is not really to salvage their ukraine project is to inflict the strategic failure the feet on russia. there are 2 different things here. we have this escalation, this the destruction of these early warning radars and has nothing to do with the battlefield in ukraine. this is a challenge in nato direct nato challenge. the rush of these are 2 things. different things going on simultaneously. your thoughts to where you are, right? these are, but again, this, this is, this was already baked in to the reasons why russia and launch the special military operation in the ukraine. the problem for russia was not ukraine by itself because

it goes to frames by itself does not pose any real strategic threat to russia, is as much smaller, much more limited in the result. so someone is ukraine in nature, ukraine as a battering ram before may. so that's what supposedly problem for russia, and that's really becoming ever more explicit now. and so we now go step by step 2, was this uh, direct involvement by the nature of powers inside russia. and, and we can see that each time they make this step, it's always literally is the provision saying, well, you know, there's going to be a very, very limited, don't worry about anything. so, you know, we do the a, we will provide them with weapons. but it has to be only in ukraine into or trip. all right. you can attack character like crime. yeah. but not rush, no problem. so the of the now now there's that,

okay. you can attack rusher property, but it has to be somewhere close to the higher co region. so that each step they go along. and of course, as soon as they said, oh, it has to be limited in through the, in the near to the heart, the region on comes the land skin or his champions in washington. i mean they, that was a, oh, that's not enough. it has to be unrestricted, then it goes most of america spots, as i said, yeah we, we put no restrictions with all that anything that we have provided. so that's the next step, is that, well, let's move back respects it. so it's beverly, as you said, with inch by inch, is becoming a direct rule between nato and russia. well, you know, martin, i, you know, um, i look at this in a very simple way. i mean, if, what is the difference in hinting inside of brushes, territory, or close to conic of what is the difference in hitting, you know, most got it's russian soil. there is no difference here. okay. i don't understand why they think that there says there's an invidious difference there isn't here.

what's really interesting to me is that the nato thinks they can do this risk free, which is very, very dangerous. because the entire theory and practice of deterrence, nuclear deterrence here, is being rapidly degraded. martin? yeah, the risk freezing is very, very worrying. when you hear people like david cameron, who is off by a journalist, well, what happens after we strike into or into the russia, into the, into real russian territory? you know, and his response was nate in russia just have to put out of your crime. that's really the only solution to the fact that this bigoted view of this, this, this incredibly blanket view. you know, so there are no other options for russia and the west has left behind is really dangerous. i'm really stupid. and now we're beginning to see, you know, how close now we are edging towards this. we keep talking about this on the show, you know, how close we are going into world war 3 scenario. we've talked about it largely as a see a radical subject. i think perhaps at some point it's going to be beyond that because

you say there's no difference between um the russian side of the border and didn't ukraine. i think there is be. so i really do think there is, i think i think for the rest of the people's or is i think for puts in there is, um, how much further can we continue with storm shot as being fly by british soldiers? no, i think we're agreeing with each other here on this made me because the hitting russian saw it was sitting russian say, oh, you know, if it's near the border, you know, there's somehow different. it's not different. it's the same thing. and george, what's important here this, these is nato, a weaponry, largely controlled by nato personnel if there are soldiers or contractors. and very importantly, it's the, the satellite, the assistance that these weapons means. those are definitely nato probably am, can almost exclusively, this is russia versus nato, nato versus russia. and they used to be acquainted suddenly out of the equation here. that's exactly right,

pizza. and these kinds of long range missile attacks inside russia and even the long range drone attacks, they could only succeed if they had guided by satellite systems. there's no way you can just simply lump by a drone and but, and magically hits a target close to the cause like some bore to this that requires satellite guidance . the only way that you can get satellite guidance is through nato and the united states. so obviously, the nato file is cheaper. the unites as already involved in firing droves in misses, on behalf of the ukraine. we'll say this gift, keep in mind the united states has not said that you create a channel. fire misses be on this limits that we're talking about. that always has to be somewhere close to the border. they have not said that. they have just simply said that, um, well, uh, you know, we,

we would prefer it if you would limited that, but we don't take part in any detailed put military planning. it's up to ukraine to decide how is going to defend itself. and the new grant is right, that about the we, we don't tell you frame what to do so. so in fact that, that's just simply the media hype the say, oh, it's been delivered very, very limited very well. it's not only about the limits it much timely. false, it's a lie. okay. i mean the, the level of encryption that need be you need to understand read to guide these drones and missiles that is highly sacred. they're not passing that onto the ukrainians. so ukrainians are being given that information. maybe they hit a button, but it's already preprogrammed the algorithm is there, martin? it's patently obvious something the george and i it, and i think you were all at this time. we discussed that it's, it's only a matter of time before article 5 of the nato treaty as being tested now. it could go in many, many different directions here. and there's a,

a gross mis reading of what it means that it's not automatic. i'm a member, countries can decide if they want to participate in it. it's not, you know, if somebody flips a flip, the switch here, but it will test the, the membership of nato. but i think this is an amazingly reckless because once you know the 1st bullet as fired, more is very unpredictable. go ahead and mark, you know, that's the problem. you know, it only takes one, but i only say it's one mic miscalculated decision on the west. and i wonder if bombing those radar installations was really a mistake, ready to wonder whether we received that the company is a marvin chart. that is the biggest thing that has happened in this conflict. and it's not given the coverage that is really necessary. when i came across at georgia and i talked about it separately, i was horrified, but i still am horrified by martin. and you know, when, when such things happen, you have to wonder how we going over how we post the article 5 of the debate. now,

you know, we, we'd be on that now. i mean, all, some people say the british and he said, i'll just say, now we all know. and what was russia? you know, we only the only rock is a russian civilians and soldiers. the question is, you know, when, what does it take, what does it take for putin to send the message? the fact that you're going to have a line i'm, i'm sure he will be very careful. i mean dos is i'm sure he will exercise extremely amount of caution, but at some point he has to do something. and if you look at some of the realistic proposal targets that he could hit, if he gets any more of this ordinance thrown out with the bold and russian people, russian civilians are being killed. you know, perhaps the nato installation in germany, the main headquarters would be exactly. you're going to talk good. well, i mean what we have for right now l george to go back to history is a from um, september the 1939 to may of 1940. we had some, it was called the phony war. i think we're in that right now. you were in

a state of war, but we haven't seen a major escalation. i think we're about to see that right now, because this is an untenable situation. and the, the, the russians will not compromise their security. this is something and you know what, what would be satellites being shot out of the? i think that's the most obvious one here is. does that count for invoking article 5? nobody knows george. that's exactly right. i, i would have thought hitting the cyber lights would be the most logical of the step . hitting bul drones in the black sea will also be the spike drones in the black sea. it would be a logical step where it's, it's clear that the, the, the nato files, i have no idea. all the them built in is going to capitulate. there is monuments thing about what david cameron's or what, what do you know, what,

what if this doesn't work? well, you know, the, yes, the just simply withdrawal from your grant that isn't going to happen. russia is not going to capitulate. so therefore, there is a path that has to be the next step, because russia cannot just simply allow nato's the to be in essentially shooting and killing russians on russian solo. so that has to be a next step. and i think that it, we are precisely been on the brink of a well well, and that's just exactly what you know remarkable speech yesterday by a victim of war. but who said this is the 3rd time we hung, gary ends up being pushed into a wall with russia. so time 19141941 now, and we're not going to do it the 3rd time. and there's a and i think he's the 1st lady was explicitly said, this is the same project. well, well, i'm well to, well, what's right, we've mobilizing your up against russia and i don't know, but i said, well,

you know, we don't want to be a positive. well, you know, a little self advertisement. george and i did an extensive video on this in our pod cast style, the goggle and i refer people to it because we talked about it a great like what he just said. you know what, martin, you know, i'm a britain is at war with russia. this is what we're being told. well, maybe the british will feel what war is like again because they were inflicting a violence upon the russian citizenry that had to have hasn't happened yet in britain. it could not good um, but i refer you back to a show we did a couple of months ago when you asked me what my opinion would be alternate. so best a policy and i said expect a lot of fake news. a we experiencing the fake news now, here with the room is that i've heard in the last week that nato is planning something big. you know, and this is being fed to a few gullible journalists and it's being pumped up into some flow. and, you know,

mark me and, you know, i think this one of the things, i mean, the 3 of us have been doing, been pushing back against this year with this is all political posturing. it doesn't mean it doesn't have consequences, but it is political posturing. that's why they're, they're not thinking strategically, they're thinking politically, and we should all be terrified of this process. they're going through gentlemen, i'm going to jump in here. we're going to go to a short break. and after that short break, we'll continue. continue our discussion on some real in stay with our team, the the

welcome x across top bullhorn design, peter level command. you were discussing some real news. right, george? you know, we had, we have, for the 1st time in american history, a former president convicted of 30 me on 34 accounts. he is legally right now a felon. but he also is the presumptive domini of the republican party. and the 2024 election um your thoughts on this? because, you know, the, the, the way you, uh, the way it's being pitched right now by liberal media primarily. you said no one will vote for a convicted felon. i think we're good. that's what is going to be tested very seriously. go ahead towards i, i agree with the visa, but it's really interesting that i need is,

ties in with what we were talking about in the, the 1st half of the show, which is the united states has become a completely and reckless, irresponsible, useless power in the world, i mean you, you will be under the doing things. no one would have tramped off provoking a, a, a world war nuclear apocalypse. and here you have the democratic policy, which at 1st was spent is essentially, uh for the, for purposes of domestic politics. whipping up a totally ridiculous, his theory about russian interference in the american domestic politics. impeaching a president full that and making dearest hopefully ranked this irresponsible attacks on the presence of these working for russia. so now they've gone the extra step and i said, okay, is a a convicted felon, i think, well, i know about that, but when it's on the election, you know, because natalie is always a click of a story for charges unanimously. the jury. well, as you said, be the,

i don't think that's vital that's, that's not a deal breaker. so then you said, well, what's next? well, i think what's next is that the democratic judge and the democratic prosecutors in manhattan. i'm going to push forward and imprisonment on july, the 11th one week before the republican nomination. they've got to push to imprison donald trump because they're going to say by the end, they're going to realize that they'll be looking at the polls. and that's a business hasn't done anything to damage drum. yeah. well we have to go to the next step. what? well, well, what it did was i didn't one day and i'm, i've got them. i get the number on life. $36000000.00 in small donations. went into his campaign. now, that was the reaction. you know, martin, if they, if this was happening in any other country, the undertaker blinking is, i call him, he would sit me calling the country, you know, the violation of the united nations charter human rights or freedom of speech. but know that the state department isn't going to react to what's going on in new york, i guess here. i mean, the double standard is so glaring, and i mean in this administration there's that they're,

they're pretty rich in the double standards. got a category here, martin? yeah, because it gives him the on the head between the any other countries, i mean, the rpm. so, you know, we looked up bill clinton's messing around with the, with the modem when it was the sentence key in the, in the white house. and the french were just, just sort of as well, you know, what's the big deal? i mean, you know, every brand, the french president has oral sex with it in terms you know, i think is a similar thing going on here, right across the world and particularly europe, you know, we look at this case against trump, them we think for goodness sake you know, he's a wealthy guy who go to his lawyers to pay off people who are black community. i mean, it happens all the time. i mean, i've done so many investigations with will see people over my career. you know, they use s, y u and pointless. and there's no sense suit. it happens all the time. yeah, i mean, it's really not a big deal. this particular case isn't really a big deal, but it could be this end of the wedge. it could create some and some, and as jude, quite right. you says, you know, them, the, the democrats be looking at the polls thinking with this hasn't really had much

impacts. we need to crank it up a bit, but we're going, it's completely unsolved. wilkins, i mean america as a brit. it gives me great pleasure to say america is a very young country and you know, then someone, so this is unprecedented and no history behind it. and you'll be really interesting to see, can we have a president in jail? i think given goes to jail, but just for me, i put my momma savings on the line slide. i think maybe you know, martin, but before we get there in a high it, when trump well, i met with the media after the verdict was given to read out to him and there was a headquarter in the crowd. and i don't know if it was a fed or it was a trump support, and we'll never probably know. but it was yelled out civil war, which is really, really remarkable. and really scary. you don't, you know, george, what they're to, what they tried to do in this ridiculous trial. i don't know. i think we're pretty smart guys here. our audience is pretty smart,

but i've never understood what this case was really about. what was the harm? i don't know what it was, so. okay. particularly since, you know, new york knew a lot about donald trump's personality and character for decades. right now, being george, being in the real estate and sector in new york, which is, you know, it's not really per steen. if you know what i mean, so it was okay. donald trump is in business in new york for 50 years, and he was never charged with a crime and then suddenly this, okay, what this saying is saying that donald trump not necessarily is corrupt, but the legal system is corrupt because this exactly right. be the biggest, this ridiculous thing because you know, anyone who really, you know, the prosecutors and, or tried to explain to manage the state. what exactly is the crime? what is it that you're saying? trump is the name of being able to do it because nobody's able to the, you know, legal x was, are unable to explain what the crime here is. but yeah,

he paid some of the, all the best of all the legal. so to make present those 34 count felony, they have to do some kind of alluded contortions to, to make, make it sound that he has committed these crimes. but on top of that, you have also a new york code that tries to bankrupt. it hits him with a $500000000.00 sign for alleging fraud when no one has this can come forward to say that they've been the food and no one is going well just like they lost any money. no one was before that. again. a convoluted theory that was uniquely applied to trump. so as well, in this case, you know, there's no rep or any with any anyone being prosecutor, for the crimes of trumpet sales because they got no record of anyone being found guilty of fraud on the new york statute that was used against them. and then we got all the others going with the zip cd and he had official class and 5 documents.

every president has lots of other words. so people can see this and say your twisting manip lacing the legal system to go off the one man. well, that's what the american republic was found. the 2 approved was, you know, we don't have the bills of attains as you know, you don't manipulate the law just to go off the one person. so essentially the, and this is, i think, large of the democrats, they've trash the system, they trash the laws that trash the quotes in order to win them election. well that's, that's a very dangerous game to play. and i think it's going to blow up in the face as well. you know, it's, it is a bit of an echo of 2016 martin because, you know, we have the clinton administration, i'm just like clinton campaign employed there pied piper strategy. you know, they will, they actually pushed him up. i mean, if we look at the media coverage over the last but obviously for the last few days, but, you know, watching the trumps legal travails. you know, just getting a lot of free coverage. okay. and is absurd if these these cases are,

they all are absurd. you know, it pump same up. i mean, the average person is george or just pulling it out and say, it looks like you're just going after the this guy. okay. yeah. and you're in your trashing along the process mark, but that nobody would appreciate that more than showing himself he would understand the power of the free media oxygen, any way use it is best devices. um you mentioned 2016. i think it's, it's more of an risk resumes for 2006. i think it's a, it's looking like a carbon copy and we won't wait. we will have to wait and see whether the voters use the same russia now. now, as they didn't to some other 16, a lot of democrats hated henry henry. i just wouldn't, didn't want to rent any cost. i'm a product and prepared to even cross the oil and light for trump, just to reform the democratic party and clean up those corruption image. use that the same things happening in person. but the conservative policy, everybody knows, can somebody buzz going full in a couple of weeks time and almost talking about it being a good thing because we need to least one to them for the concepts,

reform and come up, you know, come back with a clean, more around modern image, which people will responsive, i think, is only a quarter of regular democrat vote to see the, the wood for the trees guys. so you can see what's going on here with this. which, hans, i think i think great, we're looking at it from coming back into the white house. i think there's no question of that. you know, it? well, i mean i, i'm of the firm conviction. if he does win the election, they still won't let him get them. now if you rated that, that's a topic for another program here. george, here me look at the calculus here. um joe biden. i didn't have to find a primary. it looks like it's going to be a virtual convention that the, you know, basically the basement strategy. okay. fine. um, um, but no one loves jo by there. a lot of people that disliked him, but no one loves job. i just suppose that to donald trump. yeah. a lot of people paid donald trump, but a lot of people love donald trump. how do you square that? that's very a symmetrical. yeah,

that's exactly right. that's what i have to this day. there's so many questions about the 2020 election because we're all we're all has to believe 81000000 americans voted for this man that nobody loves nobody likes is always been the a washington political. a glad hand, a croak, and what also believes he got 16000000 more votes than brock obama, who did indeed, as, as you know, inspire many people to go out and vote for the 1st time. that's really the problem . and now it's compounded by the perception that he knows he con, waiting in a fair and square 5. so he's a ringing the system when he likes to cheat, you know, if you, you know, you're going and so a tennis tournament and then you use like the drink of your opponents. nobody's going to say say hey, you won fair and square. and that's really how biden is playing. and so there's this new ad that the republicans are running web ideas getting this going to be

able great. and when he is honest, a trumpet, the trump is saying you were behind those legal troubles. and he says, and he just gives is big the able grants. they're going to play that over and over again. and they can say, yeah, the biden is kind of tacitly admitting, hey, i'm cheating, and i just love to be president because i'm, she thinks is very, very unlikable. yes. and his eyes. so all the resources, visit ministration behind this. ok. martin, just to finish up here, you know, it's, it's quite, you know, we can do british elections later, but it's worth it. it's a pathetic commentary. but this selection in the united states is turning out again to be about personality. so you like and you dislike as a country is going to hell in a handbasket is george pointed out with all these foreign policy crisis going on, where we were asked to judge of or pick between a candidate that is basically c nile and a colorful a real estate mogul. kinda pathetic. go ahead. tv celebrity. yeah. so

that in as well. um, unfortunately we've, we've come to this stage. we come to this point where the system doesn't really allow us to choose any of the candidates, you know it's bowl down to the stupid and the corrupt or wherever, whichever way you wanna throw it. george's point is very important though, but it isn't like people don't like button. so he's only got policies, you know, or, and, or school degree, you know, teaching. whereas on the, on the trump size, you've got personality and, and policies and control. so i usually would run out of time, but i, i think unfortunately i have to start ending all of these programs. why every time we vote we get john mccain. it's all with at home. we have one of the things like as in budapest and america sort, of course, i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at ortiz the next time. remember, ross up rules the

on the back? it sounds holly cool to overturn the conviction of state treason against the mom called but the full, the 5 minutes to remain jail from marrying his wife too soon. all that so support over 3 and a whole 1000 palestinian children are at risk of immune and desperate to stall patients trying to report that has gotten a seen gave us a differential end to talk to these not being forced to resign. the debates intensifies over whether the decision by the us or canada and $110.00 pain countries to commit ukraine to strike into russia, risk free grain news clip and foaming us marine corps

intelligence officer. and dr.