what impact could garland nixon. what impact could the presidential race have on united states foreign policy? but a lot i would think. and could the outcome increase the chance of global conflicts? i'll be talking about that to colonel douglas macgregor, and we will ask what impact the international court of justice's ruling last week against israel may have on the ongoing conflict in gaza? all of that coming up, plus plenty of discussion and contrary opinion. i hope with my panellists , tom buick. but panellists, tom buick. but first, an update on the latest . news. >> good evening. i'm ray addison in the gb newsroom. our top stories tonight. protesters gathered outside downing street demonstrating against the reported arrest of tommy robinson have now moved on to scotland yard. his supporters say he was arrested under anti—terror laws, comes after a complaint was made after a film was allegedly shown at a central london rally yesterday, in breach of a high court order. two men in their 20s have died after a two se

and garland nixon hosts of the critical our on radio spot next. all right, let's start with you girl in here. um, i mean, obviously this is a major story if, if what is being reported is true, that these were american missiles fired by americans. that's already a big part of the story, but maybe even bigger is remember this, this strike to placing crimea. we've been told for years now that crimea was illegally amex, and it actually belongs to ukraine and that's full of ukrainians. and you had these missiles were fired, undoubtedly by ukraine, which means that ukraine was firing on their own people. a couple of things here. number one, and that is that we all know that these were, these were americans the technically as r f k, junior stated recently, that's an active war to fire. but for the us, that this was not new frame that ukraine does not have the technical capability to fire these missiles. this was the united states government firing weapons at civilians in russia. it's an act of war, which is in fact, a constitutional violation because the

and garland nixon host of the critical hour on radio. sputnik. all right, let's start with you girl in here. um, i mean, obviously this is a major story if, if what is being reported is true, that these were american missiles fired by americans. that's already a big part of the story, but maybe even bigger is remember this, this strike to placing crimea. we've been told for years now that crimea was illegally amex, and it actually belongs to ukraine and it's full of ukrainians. and yet these missiles were fired. undoubtedly by ukraine, which means that ukraine was firing on their own people. a couple of things here. number one, and that is that we all know that these are, these were americans the technically as r f k, junior stated recently. that's an act of war to buyer. um for the us that this was not ukraine, that ukraine does not have the technical capability to fire these missiles. this was the united states government firing weapons at civilians in russia. it's an active war, which is in fact, a constitutional violation because the presiden

garland. nixon, expert and analyst let's talk politics, mr. nixon.lo , i say good night to you, and thank you for inviting me to your program. mr. nixon, 75 years have passed since 1949, when the political leaders in the west established nato. . in fact, the problem is that it used to be thought that the us navy is the strongest military force in the world, and if the us navy ever starts and is used, no one can stop it , but now we see that this is actually being violated. we do this in war in ukraine, we are seeing that even though the american ships and ships, this organization does not actually act on behalf of the nations and people, they are actually looking for other agendas, they are thinking about it. they do not act to help the people of nations , they have a series of military goals , they have a series of security goals, and they seek to dominate the world. some countries create and this is because of the warmongering mentality of the nato leaders who use violence and actually put pressure on reach their goals mr. nixon, you mentioned some

busy analyst and commentator garland nixon gentlemen, thank you so much for being here. all right, so i am sure you guys both know jeffrey sachs, right? jeffrey sachs, award winning economist, etc, etc. it's really a smart, smart guy, very experienced, used to be invited all the time as an expert on cnn and nbc and other networks. you would see him there explaining things. he was also an advisor to many us presidents and others and government until recently, when they decided they did not like him anymore. and they didn't want you to hear what he has to say. so. busy want you to listen to his explanation of the relationship between russia and the united states. how it went south and why he thinks it could have been different. by the way. it's also an explanation of why he's no longer p goodbye there. not any of those shows. here we go. after the end of the soviet union, we thought, hey, we're pretty good. we're, we're the sole superpower. we're, we're, we're the most powerful country on the planet by fire. in a world history, we can do pretty much what we want and that i

and we discussed this with radio and see, we told show this garland nixon. you suggest the f b, i isn't really up to the task. hey, there was an article i recently share with people from 1997 where the c i a said that basically they did an investigation and found that the c i a was not in any way involved in the cocaine trade in the 1980s. the in the reality is this, if you look at the f, b, i and the, the, the department of justice and the, the, you know, the period of time the donald trump was in office and after he was in office they constantly pursued him. they constantly drummed up cases against him. they were actually more members of the department of justice who were prosecuted for taking any legal actions in their pursuit of donald trump. so the idea that the api i is going to look into an assassination of the attempt of donald trump and that, you know, americans are going to look at that as a responsible, reasonable and unbiased investigation is laughable. that the, you know, a, at a minimal while a sort of suggestive the s y is not the best agency

um, and garland nixon. both good enough to join us so far. i gentleman it's, it's, it's, it's, it's gotten so bad. it's gotten so bad because it seems that right now for the president, there is simply just no place to hide. now that the cats out of the bag, the cameras are constantly on him. he's now stumbled his way through a debate, a very public july, 4th independence day event, and the latest, the nato. summit of all things. yeah. gotta show on to you. here's the low lights. one last thing, you know, i used to think when i was a senator was there were always congestion on the highways. there's no congest anymore regarding the highway, there's no congestion. and so what the way they gave me to stop talking though, say we just shut down all the rows. mr. president, you're gonna lose all votes for, you know, get it. yeah. how are you this room? not only share a common language, don't share a common language. we do not share a common border. but we are our neighbors were neighbors. what don't. oh, my goodness, my god, bless him please lord, i

what impact could garland nixon. outcome increase the chance of global conflicts? i'll be talking about that to colonel douglas macgregor, and we will ask what impact the international court of justice's ruling last week against israel may have on the ongoing conflict in gaza? all of that coming up, plus plenty of discussion and contrary opinion. i hope with my panellists , tom buick. but panellists, tom buick. but first, an update on the latest

now let's cross live to radio and talk show host gall and nixon. garland is good to have you join me now that the us main street and media and democratic party need as have long been, do more live in from what role if any, could that have had in the assassination attempt? well, i think you could have a significant of had a significant role. we can go back to 2017 with kathy griffin, or a comedian and made headlines by holding up a, a, you know, an effigy as it were of a severed here, severed head of donald trump. but it's been much more serious than that. you know, just, i believe it was the 1st of july. it's david iran of it who was a b, b c host, literally tweeted, joe biden. should murder trump. so there has been, you know, rhetoric of, uh, you know, uh, unfortunate rhetoric, there has been a responsible rhetoric, but there have been direct call, actual direct calls for this type of action. there was another member of congress, a democrat who once said donald trump should be eliminated. so you know, this is not a matter of people making vague references. and um, you know, and havi

nixon . let us see what mr. garland next. it looks like there is, by the way, as well as political analyst and hostile be convo couch on youtube. craig pasta garden to la gentlemen. thank you so much for being with a separate rep or we appreciate as we like to save the republican convention. all right, still nothing short of a miracle that donald trump is not dead or a horribly critical condition somewhere in some hospital. i mean, literally, if the guy does not turn his head to look at, you know, some graphics that he was talking about at the time at the exact moment that the shot is fired. i mean, he would have been hit in the head instead, he turned so it is here. look, don't take my word for it. i mean take a look at this change your mind or. c well, it isn't that amazing. i mean, literally, if you look at it guys, i'm sure you've already done this and, and thought about it, but i mean, he, the bullets coming like this. when he turns his head, he puts himself in such a situation so that it hits his ear. instead, i don't k

garland to appoint special counsel, that being jack smith in this particular instance but equally as compelling is the fact judge cannon ignored president in a united states supreme court decision which is u.s. versus nixontands for the proposition that it is okay for an attorney general to have other people assist him in roles like special counsel to be able to prosecute crimes against the united states. it's baffling to a lot of us that a 93 page ruling was generated and the timing of it being it came after justice clarence thomas and immunity opinion said it is okay to be able to explore these deep questions as to whether or not special counsel appointment is valid the weight was done in this case even though that was never raised by donald trump or briefed in front of the supreme court and the timing also dropping in the first day of the rnc was a big tell when it comes to eileen cannon. >> we have to remember the source. almost two years ago the court of appeals not just overturned one of judge cannon's rulings in trumps favor but that court rebuked her for her decision. what can you tell us about the makeup of the 11th circuit and if they revive the charges will they be inclined to remove her from

garland and he is indicting a democratic senator. >> i have a one seat margin in the senate. you can do that. >> it is the kind of phone call that richard nixonake or had made. it is the kind of call they don't think has happened in the modern era although there was some stuff that happened with george w. bush that was fairly shady but it is something donald trump has explicitly tried to do it via tweet and explicit we -- explicitly believes is his right and how the justice department should run an is the controlling opinion of the supreme court in the u.s. decision by john roberts, who explicitly went out of his way in the decision to say basically that phone call i just conjured is it constitutionally. >> under this ruling by the supreme court, had joe onbiden, yesterday called up the u.s. justice department and said drop that case and he is a democrat and you are not prosecuting a democrat while i am running for reelection, the justice department would not have been within its rights to blow the whistle and they would've had to do it and it would have been immune for any action. >> again that section of the ruling is it isn't just differen

garland and be like what the hell are you doing? you're indicting a democratic senator? >> i have a one seat margin in the senate! >> that phone call is the kind of phone call richard nixoneen tempted to make or make. it is the type of phone call i don't think has quite happened in the modern era though some stuff happened with george w. bush that was fairly shady but it is something donald trump has explicitly tried to do via tweet and believes it should be his ability and it is also the controlling opinion of the supreme court in the 6-3 trump decision by john roberts who explicitly went out of his way in the decision to basically say that phone call i just conjured is fine. >> under the supreme court ruling, had joe biden yesterday called up the u.s. justice department and said drop that case, he is a democrat and you are not prosecuting a democrat when i'm running for reelection, the justice department would not have been within its rights to blow the whistle on it. they would have had to have done it. >> that section of the ruling, it is not a different reaction. the stench of someone being convicted of something that is bad to do. it speaks to what the rule of law