for the, the, [000:00:00;00] the hello and welcome to cross top floor. all things are considered, i'm theater level, better late than never trump secretary of state, marco rubio, admits america's unipolar moment. his past, viewers over this program understood this long ago. how well this admission make comes foreign policy different will diplomacy make a come back, the

prospecting from foreign policy. i'm joined by my guess. daniel is our in new york . he's a journalist and author a 3 books on the us constitution in nashville, we have ryan christian, he is founder and editor of the last american vagabond, as well as co founder of the independent media alliance. and in brisbane we crossed to what we paul, he's an adjunct professor at queensland university and technology and senior fellow at the ty, hey, institute, or a gentleman, cross talk rules of effect. that means you can jump any time you want. and i always appreciate a daniel, um, so much to talk about here. i was leading, obviously, in my introduction, i'm going to quote marco rubio right now. it's not normal for the world to have a unipolar power. remarkable coming from a secretary of state. and then on the heels of this, we have the or which seems to be the imminent destruction of the us a id at least in his current or is former incarnation. we don't know where it's going to go from here. the point is my friend,

us. so much is happening. i think they're related uh take it from here. daniel. or? yeah, i mean, i think what we're seeing is a global crash of, of neo liberalism. and it reminds me of the crash of communism in 1989 to 91. i think the water is going to a major phase change. uh the uh, the, the rules of the last 35 years or so. i have found the park and we're inter entering it to a new era. and that era is based on multi polarity, intense international competition. uh, the, uh, the destruction of old alliances, like, you know, nato is going to way of the warsaw pact. um, so, uh its uh, really a dramatic change that were uh, the was passing through. ryan, is this all a good thing? go ahead. so i'd like to start with pointing out that i think in general the destruction of us id is obviously a positive thing. if alternately, that is what happens to it. because i think it's one of the things that is being

debated, which is frustrating for a lot of us that have followed along with what has been doing is that there's some ultimate positive net positive outcome to what it does. i disagree with that. i think it's a regime change engine with some things that are done positive around it, ultimately as a cover i would argue, but i think what i'm worried about here is that the process i think is important. and i think the way this is going is indicating to me that this is more about framing it as a positive change in order to role in what i worry is that is a worse outcome. and, but like we were kind of saying off air before i, it's a win nonetheless, to see this begin to go that step. but i think what i'm seeing a lot across the trump administration right now is taking things that we've always wanted to go away on it and framing it as a positive destruction, but really already rolling in something that i see is much worse. sort of like the digital end of this, the cdc direction, walmart, private end of that. but that's what i see happening here with mosque and the rest of this the way it's going or marco rubio taking control or merging of what the state department would or wouldn't already really was. it just seems more of a shell game to me, but i'm going to wait and see how it plays out. but i think if it was gonna be done

right, it should have been done in a way that was more transparent and not only focused on the left has been doing this the entire time time. that's it. so that's just just on us. yeah, i, i agree with you because it's settling domestic political scores are also very much so because this is uh, woodside shown is being the machinations of the democratic party. they've said this very openly, so you're absolutely right. but where we go, i kind of got drawing upon what daniel had to say, which is really interesting is that, you know, when the, with the end of the cold war, the end of the soviet union, the end of the warsaw pact we had, you know, kind of a i was gonna say ideological boy, but we actually had a, a preponderance of neo liberalism around the world. i agree with daniel, 100 percent and we're not on the same frequency when it comes to many, many politics here. but it's, it's good to see that go, it's a low will be less of an ideological world. that's a plus. but the is it going back to just great power,

a rivalry which has its pluses and minuses to go ahead and brisbane, a yellow good school debate with you paid around, especially after the uh, the last time we tried disconnects on the side greetings to you and have the look, i think that's done. there's no doubt that the 35 year period of the liberalism is coming to an end and insightful nice people. they've been watching these things closely for a number of years. it ended a little while ago. it's just taken the united states leadership, i guess a lot of political legal sections of the political like come to terms of that reality. but i think it also spells the end of a 500 year period of liberal wisdom liberal clarity on going on. so we've got 2 endings in a science. one is i short term ending, which is a 35 year period of a particularly intense type of west in the liberalism. but we're also seeing fundamental changes in the way that the global economic system is old and eyes. and as a result of that,

the ways in which countries interact with each other. so it is a moments as period that we're living through. and um, you know, and that's kind of rebut arrived for quite some time because there's a whole bunch of vested interest. so don't want to let go. and i'm, and i will 5 to some the i'll of course to hang onto what i had. and um, and the struggle in a sense is going to continue for a little while get before the da simple. yes ma'am there, cuz no one likes to give up power in this, the new neo liberalism is a powerful if not toxic for say it will not give up easily as well. but daniel, i mean, you know, i mentioned great power politics. okay. for me they'll be a relief not to hear a secretary of state or we're only doing this for democracy around the world data. i think we're all tired of all of that. okay. um. but then on the other side of the ledger is a drum says he's going to take a greenland in panama. okay. i mean, not for democratic reasons either for disappear, national self is now

a national interest here. i mean, that's the flip side of it, isn't it? daniel yeah, i mean the, the, the us, you know, polarity is not unprecedented. we saw a british u unit polarity for 99 year period from the 1815 to 1914 van that collapsed. and we all know what happened next. a trump is. ready is, you know, these, he's like, he's sees themselves a copper and he's picking fights with the, with minor parties that he certainly can win. i mean, it's no big deal for the us to steam roll over canada, or mexico or, or panama or denmark for that matter. but the point is that the, the old pieces for when you're parked in a very dramatic fashion and no one knows how it. ready shape a shape shake out. so no one knows what, right?

china is reaction will be no one quite knows what russia's reaction to, well, well, you know, ryan, it, they, they, they, one of the, the, the outcomes of all of this is that the alliance system that we've been in place. it's been in place since the 2nd world war will start to unravel. i think certainly it's already been mentioned that nato may find the it's fate, is that it doesn't view assessment, need nato, the way it did before, because it's not an ideological conflict according to at least. so someone like marco rubio go ahead, right. or? yeah, i mean, i think it's worth considering this, there's might be more global collaboration on, on certain directions that we see then then the not even a lot of these different things like i, i definitely agree with what, what, what both other panels are saying in the context of what seems to be changing, but again, i would like to argue that i really worry about how that is. you know, whether it's the change is that even a positive change when you're really using 2 different establishment powers, a fight over who controls our lives. you know that that's what i kind of see happening. but i worry that there's more collaboration on the like through the like

the cobra 19 era which is not really done. we saw a lot of global collaboration on things that really concerned a lot of people that were going the direction of more of a world power. and i worry that that might be in a ways what some of these are going in the direction of, even though it does seem to be more, you know, trump taking for his own interest or for the united states interest or the government. but if you look at it on a grander scale, like what we're looking at with canada, and i mean even the, even panama included or, or mexico, you're talking about something that's been discussed for a long time, north american union dynamic, you know, coming off the conversation of something like the european union, it's the same kind of idea. and i think this is going to a very clearly away from the idea of freedom and liberty. and i think that was the problem. is that because we're seeing things go away that we argue are obviously bad. that is tricking a lot of americans into feeling like we're going in a positive direction toward freedom. when i see all of the directions, they're taking as dramatically the other direction, even if we're seeing positive things come down. and again, we'll see what comes up underneath that. that's all i kind of see it right now,

but i see these things as positive steps, but if they're simply rolling out like the fed goes away and it's simply a private stable coin, cvc, dynamic, and that's not a positive change. that's how i see it as yeah, but more work i think also the end of the word sovereignty is really important here . and you know, pursuing a sovereignty policy. the like trump appears to be doing that. it also encourages other countries to do exactly the same thing. i mean, i'd be getting to thinking in this is early days, but i wonder if you know, the, the, the ideas about international law in cooperation of the 2nd half of the 20th century is going to be forgotten. we're going to go right back to the 19th century, go ahead. warwick. it was, i pulled out all the way back to the 19th century, but done, but of course, history channel on ron a little bit. i think one of the things that we are saying and is that um, it is, is not necessarily a complete pretended right politics yet. but a recognition by the united states that the,

the foundations of its global hegemony and its global power, not along the way. and therefore, it's going to have to recalibrate its position, at least in the short term, whether that is a short term recalibration that leads to a long time system of change. whether it's really an attempt to re group is another question altogether. the recognition, i think that the debacle, the new crime is tied up amount to a strategic phase for the west nitro and of course united states. this is the dominant finance here in provider of weapons into the crime. the mess that is in the middle east of the mileage. and of course the, the diminution of american privacy in asia as old driven, i think i very realist, trumpet ministration. here's one more way we've worked before we go to the break. let me just ask you a quick question here, and because, you know, we've bad need about the term had gemini, but you know, privacy is not the same thing. crumpling. trump, once primacy isn't in ministration,

is apparently not going to stripe or to gemini. there are 2 different things, but real quick before we go to the break. yeah, look, i think he's, he's looking to, um, it looks to use some of the strategy in colloquialisms he's going to matthew's territory. yeah, i'm like adult, the territory and i'm, and that's the 1st thing that he's going to do. and clearly he's doing that model. read of that is that in part it's a task recognition of the, of the faith of, of the united states as a global head. your mom that you wrap these are about and that goes with the demise of the liberalism. and the reassertion of american preponderance cybert's and okay, so we're going to end up this part of the program on pondering some of the discuss it in the 2nd half you gentlemen, i'm going to jump in, we're going to go to a short break. and after that your break, we'll continue our discussion on transform policy, stay without doing the

same wrong. just don't have to shape house to come to after and engagement equals the trail. when so many find themselves will support. we choose to look for common ground, the the, the stuff for the machine for the picture day such as your dog with the machine pulled the should that should do this vehicle. is it the economic model? have us defined what it means? different experiments you've used doesn't figure to testify this

concept. ok, even though is then you must sort of deal with a company in some village developing bio chemical weapons inside you crate. the guns got too much noise on cheap, but the reason why the white glove service cost is because of the same as your state. the welcome make. the prospect for all things are considered on peter lavelle to mind you were discussing. trump's new foreign policy, the okay, let's go back to daniel and new york and i'm talking to the title of this program

is tax americana. and the reason why i put that there is because it seems that we are united. what we have said already in this program that there is going, there is a transition going on from pax americana to tax america. that trump has this amazing affinity for a tear of taxes. he's doesn't push sanction so much, but i mean that's still in the, in the, in the cards. it's kind of, i'm trying to uh, break bread here with ryan because, you know, these tools here can be very much, you know, associated with the behavior of neo liberalism. it may not be a spouse to say you might be all a g, but it looks for the same outcomes. daniel. oh, i don't think it does. i disagree with that. i think that on that uh that neo liberalism strove for a new world order under us of gemini. and i think a trump is a, is a bringing in a new system based on national ecos as his, his, uh, his, his,

um, tariffs, uh. where is that a good? is that a good thing? national eagle ism, is that a good thing? no, it's not a good thing at all. it's a, it's a very bad things, beggars i, neighbor policies are precisely the same as the same type we saw in the early thirty's. i mean it's, it's, it's one thing of trump imposes tariffs, but of every other country imposes terrorists and which valley ation then world trade goes to 0 very, very fast. uh, and, and with that comes, uh, a serious economic uh contraction. so uh, so trump is, you know, he's, he's bringing in a new order and questionable a, but that's not a good new order. well, um, okay, um, i can absolutely see where you're coming from here. but brian, um, as we're speaking right now, um, uh columbia, panama, mexico, and canada,

who are taking the ne, is trump on to something as well. i mean, obviously if we're just talking about whether or not he wins in his political dynamic, then he's, then he's gaining. but ultimately, this is of, i think, a negative thing, whether we're talking about the way the world sees the united states policy or, but whether we're just for whether the united states is in any way what he pretends to be to the world. right? i mean, it's, it's just as imperialism naked, imperialism the way of carrying this out. why didn't the parents are not, it's, it's belligerent in my opinion. and again, go back to the point that i think this is about like, like you, it's interesting you, you talked about like the old, like dynamic, a new world order, new liberalism. but you know, in comparison to what he's doing today. but i frankly think it's just kind of the merging of all this stuff. it's, i, this is going in that direction of a global power. but not, i mean, it's hard to see it when you think through, through trump, only as this nationalistic kind of, you know, america 1st, but that's not really what their policies are. when you look at a broader dynamic look at the what the, i mean, i don't see much deviation between buy in terms policy when it comes to foreign policy for ukraine, for israel. and i think quite frankly, we're seeing

a lot kind of just break down in that very basically us government throwing all of us agendas out for the interest of other foreign policy agenda as far as real, for example. and so if we're talking about the parents, we're talking about the, you know, candid and extra dynamic. we're watching things implode, things that have destroyed previous bipartisan or just, you know, any both democrat and republican administration from before that we're trying to accomplish. or just the basic idea of the rules based order that is completely collapse because of their foreign policy. that's not in america's interest, even right now or trump is doing. you can argue there's interest and resources and, and, and x, y, and z. but as you were pointing out, the terrorists are only going to begin to cause more international problems for both countries, even though you see some beginning to take the knee as you put it. i think it's only got a spin out further when other countries react, and so i see in the negative and all of this other than imperialism for jeff. yeah, i mean, why don't we get me, you in and we could really, we can figure out this entire conversation in the sense that trump wants to have

a fortress um, uh, western hemisphere. i mean, it was being clued, so apparently, uh, greenville. and here it looks like, you know, he, he wants a power block. okay. and ryan is absolutely right. i mean, as we speak right now, um, the israeli prime minister is visiting the united states. we'll see if marco rubio is approach to the world. you know, when he was on making kelly what's going on with us, a id that may all be a side show the in, in new cycle time, considering the vested interest that the binding ministration and apparently will find out the trumpet administration has with the genocide going on and gaza. a look, i don't think that there is a tiger and strategy at this point in time. i think that there is a kind of here and a saw switch, i guess some others have described here is a form of nationalism or an actual egoism. but what we say is a whole bunch of, of initiatives or actions that um, you know,

i say to satisfy particular constituencies and also say to create a particular emotional responses from the political bice and, but that's largely about heated the volume. and so we don't have that kind of here in strategy in relation to ukraine, promises of solving that in 24 hours. not withstanding the fact that it was a bully campaign hod. terribly have amounted to nothing at this point in time. and i'm not convinced that there is actually a meaningful strategy at all to bring back more to a meaningful close. that's certainly nice strategy and a license stabilizing the middle east and on and believes that there is a strategy in the license or the asian pacific. eva, all they raise at the moment, is a consolidation loan, which is around the back yard, so to speak. and an assertion of rage law, sorry, i have a negative. so did quite clearly not in the same league. you know, it's a pretty easy thing to do as a terrace. the reality is,

is that you lot of sides my own, the wheels, the, the, the big stick that once the in i am and, and that's mainly because the united states contribute to not more than 15 percent of global will trade today, which is down from 20 percent and the 60 is a guy. frankly, it is just less important, relatively speaking, and sort of has less impact in terms of with policies, breaks nations i able to adjust. should they be a 100 percent tariff imposed on them within all of this to my 2 and a half to 3 is to fully comp insights to the loss of the us market the us. in the meantime, we'll take the training for 5 and 10 years and possibly even longer to adjust to a loss of the industrial machinery, the robotics and not to mention the rule materials have comes from the rest of the world. you know, when you've been living on devices of i use for the last 3540 years and you come to

the realization that at some point a really call them the names real things. it's a bit of a shopping realization of the world doesn't need american are using the why once the that's just the reality. it daniel, this new approach, and i think all of us would agree it's, it's in its formative stage right now, or maybe it's just a one off. they wanted to go after this agency. and ned could follow, which would be great in my opinion. but daniel, they've been given the trajectory, at least this is as trumps approach making the world more or less safe or oh, it's making us far less safe. i mean, 1st of all, number one, i mean you have to where you're told with things like this, you use phrases like trumps approach. trump is a highly erratic individual. yeah. i mean, is a really a med tech. there's a certain kind of lodge in what he's doing, but he has not thought this out fully, and he's gonna get in big trouble very,

very soon. the just stabilizing effects are profound. i mean, i think the, you know, the, the, the, the weakening of nato will have dramatic fx throughout the region, concepts. so it might actually feed the war up and ukraine rather than the tamping it down. this is a and that, of course, the middle east. i mean, i mean that yahoo is now trumps both of them. how he is the he is the trump whisper . and so, so essentially he's running the entire middle east as a proxy for the us. and that is pretty extraordinary. and that does not. ready a more peaceful region, obviously, corrupt. i'd like to point out though that i go ahead and go ahead, jump in. i'd like to point out that i think that it's, it's worth considering and it's, i'm of the opinion that it's possible you go the way around, right? the idea that we're watching all of these things that as you pointed out, are,

are not in the, i mean you can say for instance, greenland and minerals that meet are either resources. there's a renter's for america that might be positive for short term gain or maybe long term gain. but ultimately it's, i think like i said, in that positive and a lot of different reasons that are imploding, a lot of things for a long term american interest. and i think that that benefits is real and a lot of ways and that's more abstract. i think for some people, unless you understand some long term policy that they will just to be frank that, that people like ben get there and smoke drifts. and some of the more radical people are openly talking about, which is the stabilisation of 4 countries. weaponized migration, these, these are with statements by them just so that's clear. but so thinking about how these things like people with nato. i think you could argue that these things benefit what they're trying to accomplish in the world. let's not forget that even the promises of the ending funding for ukraine or israel for that matter, both have been broken even recently, despite the pause, even though they what is really age of continue. trump then through poland for through israel set weapons back to you create that just happen. so it just seems to be even challenging as on promises to his base. i think i see all of this is in the

interest of at least 4 and countries as opposed to united states. but i would say israel, i think that's worth considering a war waco of last 40 seconds. go to you that you've given what we've heard from daniel and ryan, is there a coherent strategy here? go ahead. 35 seconds. this is not a good strategy. it's um, it's a series of emotionally driven reactions to changes in the world that the trump is coming to grips with. it is a function of a deep state of displacement, anxiety from a country and a man who has experienced um, a world that was dramatically different and where the united states side of the penny. oh, that's not along with. okay, it's, it's quite fascinating the, the, the, the new administration is inherent in a world very, very different than the 1st administration of trump. it's really quite fascinating . and i guess we'll all agree, we'll see where it all goes. it's, it's very difficult to keep track of what's going on here. i want to thank my,

i guess in a natural new york and in brisbane. and of course, i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at r t c. next time. remember, across platforms, the,

the, or take a fresh look around his life. kaleidoscopic isn't just a shifted reality distortion by power to vision with no real opinions. fixtures designed to simplify. it will confuse really once a better wills, and is it just because it shows you fractured images, present it is, but can you see through their illusion going underground again? the

the, the chess willis. i am the. nobody's telling me that he will find him get this, but i'm gonna forward it to bill about authority and still booth about some of it from the umbrella dealership within the number of what it says. this woman hides

her face and identity because of the nature of her job special she's been working for almost a year and a team gathering evidence on the existence of sync with us labs and ukraine. the russian interior ministry suspects that we use to test biological weapons for the 1st step is that then they saying that she's the real quick. it was see who she has been able to have to escalate to expedite didn't exceed the shape. what the, he and the she was up before the ukraine army reduces them. stuff, tried to remove all materials and documents, but they failed. the only thing that i knew you send the record is not available to choose between users to it looks like the card that you go to cause of whom in a number of words. so for all the he, one word court just spin each,

just go by still doing you. when the abandon lab investigators found evidence of operations with density viruses and paper with a test on a named patients. it's on known how many similar centers of being established in ukraine over the past 8 years. but the russian ministry found signs of them in almost all liberated major settlements, which they see in it that in these hold a category of some chad is showing the subscript wallace tab still. so we need to so that we originally caught a few of the yearbook as anya, still pushing chest that we were needing to speak to a fund that we missed each one of this month. sure. what are some your to be with the one of us that on lease me or to like oaks on a many people around the world are trying to find the answers to the question. some created this network of bio weapons factories. ukraine has a biological research facilities for how long and where has it