was your father involved in a criminal scheme to provide kickbacks? well, if he refuses to talk, he can then go to jail for contempt of court. so. so this thing is not quite as simple and clean as it is been presented in some of the media. and it's interesting that full, the president bill clinton jumped to joy biden's defense off the pause and hon. sir mister clinton claims. the democrats still have a much better track record or did not regard than the republicans. it's not a good enough excuse. yeah, uh, bill clinton, who got, you know, bribed by mark rich, who was, you know, a corrupt individuals of, you know, the, the, the, the money that flowed into the clinton foundation, subsequently, you know, quite large and learned how to make do business with us. it is the look, it's not just the democrats, uh, you know, you're a john curiosity who's been uh, you know of them both on r t and then at

a show on our t. all he, he went and asked for a rudy giuliani to intercede with donald trump for a pardon and julia on a $1.00 to $2000000.00. it's illegal, but you know, so that gives you an idea that, you know, the united states likes to point the finger at rushes at all. your corrupt a man. we do look at the mirror, the, the crux it over on the side of the wall. the ocean is, is, is, uh, okay, you know, equals anything in other countries that we try to accuse others of doing. people have shown that already started i during the presidential race, mr. trump as directed to take legal action against he's the critics. do you think that's something that he might actually follow through? well well, yeah, i know he should not. well, if, if, if he goes after critics, then, then he's being as bad as that, which of what was done to him up the,

i think there are legitimate cases to be brought against people for abuse of the judicial process and frivolous prosecutions. you know, look to the so called deep state they were, they were very much committed to trying to destroy donald trump and prevent him from becoming president. because that trump is it trumps the one thing that they've never really had in a president. that's a, a guy can't be bought. he's already got his $1000000000.00. he's not, he's not driven by saying, hey, i want to become the, the biggest 1000000000 era in the world. now he's, he's content with what he has. and i do believe that he sincere when he talks about wanting to make america great. again, it's just, it's one thing to say that this does seem to have a clear plan for doing it. and i, i don't think he's going to get distracted by going on of in data simply against those who criticized or so that in kind thanks about a large on so no is good speak to you. we've been speaking to laurie johnson,

former c i a analyst on the c e o, a book associates have a great day. thanks and thank you for joining us here. and i'll tell you what that what sends you more at the top of their or the, [000:00:00;00] the hello and welcome to cross stock were all things are considered. and peter lavelle, nato says be a line should not be considering a peace plan for ukraine. but in said, be focused on sending more weapons because of again, the alliance demonstrates it can never entertain plans for peace and stability as well as security. for all in the meantime,

the slaughter continues the prospecting nato. i'm joined by my guess, scott ritter in del mar. is a former intelligence officer and united nations weapons inspector in salt lake city. we have david pine. he is deputy director of national operations for the task force on national and homeland security. and in san francisco he crossed to jack ras moves. he is an associate professor of economics at st. mary's college, as well as the author of the scourge of neo liberalism, are a gentleman. crosstalk rules and effect. that means you can jump any time you want, and i always appreciate it. let's go to 1st. the scotts scotts in washington dc. scott, you're usually in delmar, but you're in washington. why to washington? because the, today we are closer to a nuclear or between the united states and russia at any time in the nuclear. this is

a far more dangerous situation than the cuban missile crisis. and if something isn't done to alter the trajectory that the united states is currently on with russia, there is a, not just possibility, but probably of a, of a nuclear war. so saturday, i will be moderating at a, a, and event at the national press. club of we're gonna have 3 panels of distinguish speakers talking about the danger of nuclear war and talking about what can be done to, to get congress to, to take action, to put pressure of the, by the ministration between now and january, 28th. and also what could be done to get the trump transition team to speak out forcefully against this policy. specifically, the use by ukraine of american provided american targeted attack him dismissals. the united states is a party to this conflict. we are actively attacking rush as we speak. i'll say it

one more time. so your audience is very clear of this. the united states is attacking russia. this is an act of war. and if we continue to do this, russia has every right to respond in kind which could lead to direct conflict between the united states and russia, which will inevitably become a nuclear war. so we're trying to stop this. this is what i've tried to do this coming saturday. well, i commend you and i hope it gets as much coverage as possible. i will do my best obviously, david in, in salt lake city, on the back of what scott decided, which is very important. is it in the, in the media? is it we get it? we're getting dribs and drabs right now of what of the a bite and the outgoing by the administration is leaving the incoming trump administration. we know the cast of characters we have. we've had a general keith kelly we j. d vance. rick right now. um. okay, fine. but the things i'm reading particularly like from bloomberg and quote,

ukraine seeks a sustainable piece. well, it's what she expects, the same, stressing that temporary resolutions would not serve us. so ukrainian interest. this is a theme that we keep going over and over and over. russia has interest to rush is involved in this here, but we constantly see plans being made really with the exclusion of russia. it's, that's not going to work. go ahead and salt lake city. you know, you're absolutely right here. when you know it's difficult when a power is, there's no countries winning a war there and it wants to get this the term. so in this case, russia has been when even more over the last 2 or 3 years, i think guess, uh, no longer debatable. and you know, as a result, you prayed in the us, i have to accept a piece, disagreement, terms that are minimally acceptable to the russian federation. and so that, that's really the key that's been missing all this talk about nato membership being

pushed back. that's completely unacceptable. to russia, the idea of the week that we would send data peacekeepers to patrol a dmc that i me that is that on arrival there's no way that the present person would accept that. so you know, the key, the key to you praise security is, is not on the line with the west because we prefer not capable of providing for their security if you grant is lost 30 percent of its population since 2014 mostly refugees and its economy is, it has been destroyed, it's pretty political structure, has been destroyed. it's notorious, been wiped out with a 1000000 casualties, which 400000 are debt. and the only way you can have security is through a friendly relations with russian federation. well, as it did from 1991 to 2014. yes. but see yeah, it's got a jack in san francisco. that's why i have long argued the day this started ukraine loss because the european pan, your pain security order had been destroyed,

did bits and patters right now. and that is because of nato, that is because of nato expansion. we need a complete re think when, when ukraine security is considered, it cannot be separated from russia's and this is what the wes, particularly nato does not want to deal with. go ahead in san francisco. i don't think uh, nato wants peace. they may, i agree with you. absolutely. i agree with you. sorry. go ahead. no, i don't feel good pieces on the agenda here. they're looking for some formula to begin negotiations without any kind of intent of several anything. and what we've got going on in the american ministration. now there's been some tense, internal battle as to who is going to represent the trump administration and trying to seek some sort of negotiations. and it's really where it's um, because of the appointments recently looked like a retread. neil cons, i mean you got waltz, do not work. and i,

you got rubio heads. this is probably out and you got the sense is probably in a most of the trouble appointments that was supposed to shake up the deep state. uh, you know, i walk through right now and uh, i don't, i get bought tens uh much positive here. uh. as i said, they may try to begin negotiations of some kind, but that will be to justify. uh, uh, further uh, arm shipments to say, well, we gotta negotiate from a position to strength. clear. so we gotta really post the ukraine, but you know, you can send all the weapons you want. uh, but if uh ukraine is losing reserves in the you know, the quality of the new recruits is such a, it's not going to make much difference just based on the more weapons and with scott also in the same kind of media particularly bloomberg seems to have a corner on the market right now there was mention of, but of course the carrots and sticks will be needed. i think we've had enough

sticks with this. that's why we need to resolve this complex. again, you know this, this is a, it's like a, a self licking ice cream cone. you, this is, it's all hermetically, close there. and plus, there's no communication with the russian federation at all. i mean, how can use that even think about negotiations? let's go back to the premises, the you discussed with your other guess of united states data or not looking for a piece. the current policy of the united states has to see the strategic defeat of russia using the ukrainian proxy conflict is the principal tool of the stabilisation. that is the official policy as united states and nato. so everything that's being done right now is not designed to be in opposition to the policy, but you recognize the difficulties of the current situation and try to mitigate that gets to feed by creating contain. but what we're looking at right now with all

these talked about peace is not about normalize relations. creating good relations is about containing russia, about trying to limit the scope and scale of the russian victory to keep it temporary in nature until some future date. when the russian gave decide reverse the ukrainians are straight up honest about this. so the trump administration has to understand that any success with russia because i agree with your, your, your, your guess this is a non starter. i can't speak on behalf of the russian government. indeed, just simply a period of the show was get a very budget irritate the the i would just prevent prohibited me from speaking to you to our team, to anybody in the russian government. but i don't care who the but the fact is, we're not about normalize relations. we are about containing russia. and if we don't start off the truck, the administration started off, not only by preventing a nuclear war by seeing this attack on russia,

but by openly say that we no longer are seeking the strategic defeat of russia. because that's the, that's the, that there is a requirement for going forward. if we continue to pursue a policy that speak 6, the strategic defeat of russia, russia will never sit down at the table with us. why sit down and talk to an enemy who's trying to defeat you? what you need to do, therefore it does defeat the enemy, which is what russian was doing on the battlefield. a new great. yeah, david, the way the it's being reported. yeah. you know, mean what's coming out of the, by the ministration, which of course is trying to make the situation as worse as possible. that is a new and remarkable achievement of this outgoing failed administration. but essentially what they're doing is they're saying what's have min minutes 3. i mean it's, you know, almost no one knows that because we, we are outside of a few programs like this and a judge nap where scott appears quite often. people do know that history means one

to but we're not going to do number 3, that's not an on the cards. go ahead. dave, as well. main street was the symbol agreement. you know russia committed there and drop there and ask for it for a pre war ukrainian territory over there. and of course, flash likely would have been next the, the drop off people through the complex, but that still would have left 93 percent of the brands in or nationally recognize territory for any control. so they had a tremendous opportunity to have a win win piece agreement back in march 2012, 22. and the final step horse drawn to the retail it. so i don't think divided restoration is interested in these they're, they're trying to rash up the world present. uh, you know, truck with uh, with a hard to sabotage. is there a sincere attempt in the war? i think trunk will be successful in uh, you know, 14 a ceasefire that ends in the warren ukraine. i'm a little bit more skeptical that he'll be willing to immediately entertain piece terms that are, you know, a long term disturbs that are acceptable to russia. yeah. but i think

disappointment in general can walk through the problem or the but the problem with that is i'll go and go back to jack in san francisco. is it a ceasefire? isn't the solution here that doesn't solve the security problems? the, the european cotton and faces right now, i cease fire a truce. it's not going to work for the reasons that scott, just a numerated. go ahead track before we go to the break. yeah, i don't think they even monona says fire i. i think they want another formula for continuing to conflict, maybe at a, at a lower intensity here. the us, uh, you know, the neo cons uh, don't leave. they have to be, they have to be driven out the, there's no solution to this through a negotiation in a compromise and ok, it's all over. let's go home. no, they'll stay or no fight in some way. and that's what they're searching for. right now they're searching for some new or new arrangement where the, the war can be continued under the. yeah. but that,

that wouldn't mean not going right back to the beginning of the program, wisconsin. that would mean escalation. well gentlemen, we don't have much further to go before you're at the ultimate escalation, jack. i mean, 10 seconds before we go to the break deck. yeah, well, uh, i don't think they want the further escalation, unless they can. uh, you know, more uh russia into using tactical moods. i think that's with well i, i think they have to, they've taken care of that, what weapon care category. and we'll get to talk about that in the next part of the program. 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 our discussion on nato and ukraine. stay with our team, the welcome back to cross talk. we're all things are considered. i'm peter le bell to

mind you were discussing nato n ukraine. the . well, let's go back to scott in washington. you know, for all the talk of, of negotiations. i'm getting a team together and that point person on all that, scott, at the end of the day, this is going to be dealt with on the battlefields is that's the only because of the, the type of people that are being um, involved in this here. i mean, what does that mean? kelly's what they mean. he and he's been doing this for like 70 years or something . i mean, people don't change. okay. and that's why it's good to be settled on the battlefield . scott, you know, i, i believe that again, i don't pretend to have any insight into russian government thinking i don't speak on behalf of the russian government. that's the little aside for the f

b i who's watching this that's just my assessment. after years of studying the russian government, this russian government and they haven't done what they've done here, they didn't initiate what they called military technical means back in february of 2022, just to throw it all away. people need to understand that russia has committed to a course of action that will only hit this is an extra stipulation for russia. that's a critical words, words matter when you're dealing with russians and russian policy. this is an x, the central issue in russia is committed the national survival of russia to this conflict. and they are not going to deal. they are not going to draw it away. anything less that achieving the outcomes that they have articulated, which is no nato membership demilitarization of ukraine, the notification to be trained, anything less than that is a strategic defeat for russia. therefore, unacceptable to russia, in the less needs to understand that, that in pushing russia to this good,

remember this conflict didn't begin in february 22. this conflict began well prior to 2014, but it, it took a detroit form in 2014, and russia has been seeking to avoid this conflict that entire time. what do you think permits one was? what do you think the bench to was? what do you think the rushing the effort to of to insert draft treaties. december of 2021. where you go, what do you think the 1st negotiation phase post conflict was to get to minutes? 3 in this, of all the effort to avoid this very situation. but the west refused to cooperate. the west refused to negotiate. in russia now is fully committed, fully committed to achieving the outcome. it's says, must take place for russia to survive. this is an extra central struggle, that's why i think any talk of negotiation, freeze cease, fire is

a non starter because it would be russia basically say we lost it versus not losing their winning on every phase of this conflict, militarily, economically, politically, well, either gave a tender thing, and then again, so many people in the west of failed to understand because they're not told is that this is an x, a central correct for russia. but for nato, this is a choice. this is a craven choice rush. it does not threaten nato security, but nato threatens russian security. david in salt lake city as well. i think russia definitely does the threatened native security today. we didn't do so before the war. that's that, well actually, it was created made so is attacking russian territory. that is a threat is russia attacking nato territory? no, it is. it is not the same thing. you can't. you can't pair the to keep going and salt lake city. yeah, you're absolutely right. so nato has been the aggressor here,

you know, it's been a defunct fairly demonizes as the dresser. uh, this was not enough provoked regression. this was the most provoked more that i've ever seen in modern history. and you know, cause want a pc spent 15 years trying to negotiate a peaceful solution to the x, a central threat of data on ukraine in every day since every day since the day after the war. russia has had peace terms that were mostly reasonable in it. and we've created the situation for just the last newbies. you know, the real solution is, is um, it's on the negotiating table. uh, you know, we need to, us needs to negotiate, uh, kind of, uh, a new and talk with uh, with russian not just the dates on it and taught where the us and russia, because strategic partners to support the peace and stability throughout the world . but especially in europe, and we can do that by reading to uh, you know, end the war on turns. so russia, pulling back all us troops,

20000 us through to eastern europe, withdrawing all of our nuclear weapons from, from europe, wisdom reciprocal, reciprocal concessions on the russian side. and then restoring full diplomatic trade to us we, we should have a free trade treaty with, with russia. we should have a, you know, totally engagement. we should, we should give them a sphere of influence. and you know, all the former soviet republics except for the baltic states and in return they can give us your thoughts. it in, in western uh, the western has here, but uh, i think uh the advantages i hope you're is the premium is a champion apiece. uh president, trump is a chair in a piece these pick some, some new cause, some very good want to america burst in service, but also some neo cons that don't want peace. and i think he's going to get very frustrated with those new context. and he's going to twist their arms and make them agreed, you know, accepts terms that are acceptable to, to moscow. yeah. well, i had a jack in san francisco. i think they died from day one. uh the uh, the,

the deep state or the bureaucratic state. the permanent state, they are going to turn ukraine in to donald trump's biggest nightmare. and we already see it happening because jack, with the idea is the david just the numerator on our, our good ideas. i couldn't disagree. cope with being paid for doing any of them, jack? yeah, well, you know, uh, this is not just the conflict in ukraine. uh, i wrote an article in january 22 before the hot more began entitled 10 reasons why the us, they want russia to invade ukraine. there's a lot to be game for the empire by initiating, continuing this war. you know, before the war uh us was losing as well as was that made? oh, well now they've totally, you know, captured, recaptured nato again and one of the main objectives of the war, i say, wish to draw russia out of western europe economically. and the us to, uh, you know,

penetrate into europe and take over the energy reading some of the other industries . well, the u. s. a. empire has been totally successful. the amount objective. there's other objectives as well and wrong. busy on not just defeating russia on the ground, and that's one reason why i think they're going to continue this conflict in some shape or other even under trump. well, i mean a good. yeah, i think this is going to be with us all for a very long time. it's interesting, jack, what you said, i mean the united states is very kind to its allies, isn't it? i mean, they destroy its energy infrastructure. it wrap it in place and sag nation, and this is all because you're a member of nato. it's really remarkable. scott, i'll bet you. i'm not a really a betting man, but whatever outcome there is, it's good to go back to the diplomatic notes that russia sent to the united states and to nato uh, in december, before the february of 2022, with god. that's the roadmap. and they're going to refer back to it. i bet you

anything they're going to do that, scott. and i think you're a 100 percent correct? uh, the, the, you know, at the time of rushes submitted these draft treaties to nato, into the united states. so they were marked him. the western circles is unrealistic of what is russia think they're doing because the perception was the rush was operate from a position of weakness today. i don't think anybody's thinks the rush is operating from a position of with this ad. these draft documents suddenly become an extraordinarily well thought out pieces of diplomacy that could create a european security framework that could engender the kinds of stability that was spoken of that has a western sphere of f. once a russian sphere of life, importance and not a of, in, in the 2 sites, not being in conflict. but here's the problem. the nato does the russians a threat in russia? it is

a threat that because russia threatened the state of but because nato has defined its very existence as be predicated on a need to confront russia next, essentially. therefore, the failure to defeat russia has led to a situation where nato is in danger of collapsing. you know, you speak of the united states coming in and disrupting other europe, anytime you can take it over. good, congratulations, america you did. it did in the united states predict the rise of a alternative for doing sled in the fact that if it lands and it's headed on a trajectory of victory, jeremy withdraw from the you, which means jeremy withdrawals from the data. that's not what the united states wanted. did they predict the parliamentary outcome in france now that protest tried to avoid, but he kept his government, the government's collapsing now of pro peace. the sympathetic russian parliament might come in the united states and predict that europe is devolving,

collapsing re define himself. and so that's the only reason why these russian draft treaties may not be viable anymore, because they were drafted with a strong unified europe in mind. i don't think the europe exists anymore, and i don't think it's going to exist. so there's going to have to be of russia in the united states or to this out. i think europe is based on the 5 itself. i absolutely agree here. you know, it's interesting, scott, the, you know, they, they, they, they, you had all the variables, the sanctions in the oil embargo, all days. they had all of these things figured out except for, oh, democracy. they didn't take that into account and now it's coming at a blow black. i'm blowing back at them, david, you know, where's mag and all of this? i'm really quite bewildered. ok. the trump ran on this very openly. okay. i don't think anybody to agree you're all saw within 24 hours. okay. that,

that was campaign hyperbole. but you know, where is mac in this forum policy, i'm getting a little worried go ahead and salt lake city as well. trip isn't it? as made a few really good gigs. uh, you know, uh, tulsa gabber, guys and some other folks like that that i think you're going to give them some good advice. and most notably, journeyman, i mean, judy vance is a very vocal opponent of the war. and ukraine is, he was wanted to end it yesterday. and he's, he's going to be a visual and drugs here and telling them to, you know, to be, to all kill lots ridiculous, you know, con proposals for, for ceasefire. peace with russia. so, you know, in my opinion, you should have said judy vance to be that special ed boy to negotiate the, the rest of the parentheses pretty much. and by the way, this, this needs to be a us rush or a piece for you pray and does not need to be involved. us represents you crazy interest. and zaleski is out a lot any piece piece uh, negotiations with uh,

the russian federation. so he is proven to be uh, you know, not a reliable part of a piece. a truck is, is, or israel. i am a part of a visa. fine, of course has a joke. uh, he spent 10 minutes in the last 3 years talking about new credit and basically is reading out our position, our opposition to rushes invasion which is essentially kind of a pre emptive invasion to roll back on the, you know, went through all expansion and can you create and restore your brand to it's a peaceful but for state and federal law for state status a pre made onto. so i still hopeful, but the more i've heard about the kellogg plan, the more discouraged i am in terms of an immediate solution. well, as i, as low as i said in my and at the end of my introduction, the slaughter continues. gentlemen, i really appreciated very thoughtful program and that's all the time we have one. i think my guess in washington dc, salt lake city and in san francisco. and of course i want to thank our viewers for

watching us c r t c. next time. and remember prospect of the, the the which is the, the decision of the constitutional court represents more than just a legal controversy. it is in fact and officially sanctioned cool. the rule of law is in an induced coma. romania is on table presidential, kind of a slams the constitutional close decision to scrap the results of the 1st round that he won was also points to wind the run off bed. full sco stays wash is new, a rush, they can miss all system could be deployed invalid with the honda. so when i