Secretary of State Rubio: "People need to grow up" (03-03-2025--Hour2)

[00:00:04] What's going on? Thank you so much for listening to this podcast. It is heard live every day from noon to 3 on WBT Radio in Charlotte. And if you want exclusive content, like invitations to events, the weekly live stream, my daily show prep with all the links, become a patron, go to thepetekalendershow.com. Make sure you hit the subscribe button, get every episode for free, right to your smartphone or tablet. And again, thank you so much for your support.

[00:00:29] Our number two, News Talk 1110-993-WBT, 704-570-1110. Email is pete at thepetekalendershow.com. Lots of analysis this weekend about what happened in front of all of us that we could see. And people telling us things that I did not see happen, but they wanted to, like, craft the narrative, right?

[00:00:57] They wanted the narrative to take hold that it was an ambush. That word was used by the media and Democrats, but I repeat myself, like, nonstop all weekend, that somehow Trump and Vance ambushed Zelensky at that meeting. I did not see that at all. And I don't say that as somebody who worships at the feet of Donald Trump.

[00:01:21] So, like, I just, I witnessed what I witnessed and Zelensky seemed to be the antagonist. And what we have now learned is that there was a meeting before the Oval Office meeting that Zelensky attended with a whole bunch of Democrats. And did these Democrats tell him to go in there and pick a fight? Did they tell him to stand strong against Donald Trump or something?

[00:01:54] David Strom at HotAir.com writes that they appeared to think that an ambush of Trump in the Oval Office would either force him to concede more to Ukraine than he was otherwise willing, or at least humiliate Trump and give them political ammo that they could use to weaken Trump as he romps over them. Michael Kuz, a Polish diplomat, said, quote,

[00:02:20] I listened very carefully to the entire public part of the exchange between Zelensky, Trump and Vance. Sorry, I'll be honest. Zelensky absolutely did not let himself be provoked. He was actively looking for a fight or he knows nothing at all about American political culture. Trump, yes, nonchalantly approached the facts about European politics and history like most Americans.

[00:02:50] However, he was relatively conciliatory for 80 percent of the time of the conversation, talking about himself as a businessman who had reached an agreement and wanted to take a middle position between the parties to the conflict. Zelensky kept correcting him, attacking him. He even countered neutral remarks about the destruction of Ukrainian cities, which could have been safely passed over in silence. Vance also initially attacked his predecessor, Joe Biden, not Zelensky.

[00:03:20] It was Zelensky who first attacked Vance as if he owed him something. Then everything spilled over. He said, I lived and worked in the U.S. for years. And culturally, I literally have no words for what the president of Ukraine did. My teeth hurt from gnashing when I watched it in its entirety. As I wrote, I perceive Zelensky's behavior as an attempt to play to the public in Kiev. Then he will return to negotiations.

[00:03:50] However, if there is no such return, it will be his own fault. Before this meeting occurred, Zelensky met with anti-Trump Democrats who apparently advised him to reject the terms of the minerals deal that the president was offering. That's at least according to U.S. Senator Chris Murphy, Democrat from Connecticut, who said, quote, Just finished a meeting.

[00:04:20] He tweeted this. Just finished a meeting with President Zelensky here in Washington. He confirmed that the Ukrainian people will not support a fake peace agreement where Putin gets everything he wants and there are no security arrangements for Ukraine. And then he had a picture of Zelensky at a conference table with Murphy and all of these other Democrats. Murphy and the others got the outcome that they wanted.

[00:04:50] David Strom says the fireworks at the White House gave them an excuse to replay their Russia, Russia, Russia hoax. Once again, they and their media handmaidens are dishonestly insisting that Trump is in Vladimir Putin's camp. Like the original Russian hoax that consumed much of Trump's first term, Russia 2.0 is born of political desperation. After months of not knowing how to respond to Trump's fast populist start to his second term,

[00:05:20] Dems up and down the food chain decided that the president's refusal to write a blank check to Zelensky and a pledge of military guarantees amounts to a gift to Putin. And then, Strahm goes on to point out that even Lindsey Graham, who has been very pro-Ukraine, came out against Zelensky in this, saying it's long past time for the Europeans to show they are capable of defending their own continent. They have allowed their militaries to be hollowed out.

[00:05:48] And when Europe speaks, no bad guy listens. Now, it's hard to say whether or not the Democrats' move was purely cynical on their part, right? Sacrificing Zelensky and Ukraine for their own political ambitions, or maybe they, I don't know, maybe they thought both that, you know, they would benefit and Zelensky would benefit. I don't know. But that meeting did happen.

[00:06:16] And that tweet was sent by Chris Murphy. And we saw what we saw in that meeting. It seems pretty obvious. Now, let me go over to Marco Rubio, who appeared on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos.

[00:06:39] And he pointed out, shouldn't we all be happy that we have a president that's trying to stop wars and prevent them instead of starting wars? Right? We're trying to end a war. And you can't end a war unless both sides come to the table, he said. Do you know what the United Nations resolution was? I'll tell you if you want to hear what it was. It basically said this has been a horrible war. It's time for it to end. The job of the U.N. is to bring about peace in the world.

[00:07:06] I thought that's what the U.N. was created to do, to stop wars and to prevent them. And that's what the resolution did. Was it antagonistic towards the Russians? No. Back to the point. But it also didn't praise the Russians. All it said is, this is a bad war. It needs to end. And by the way, at the Security Council, which has not been widely reported, the first resolution on Ukraine that has passed the Security Council in three years passed this week because of the leadership of President Trump. And it's a resolution that says, bad war needs to end. Let's bring the two sides together. Let's bring the two sides together.

[00:07:36] That's what the resolution is. Again, what is the United Nations for? Isn't it not a forum to promote peace in the world? And shouldn't our president, shouldn't we all be happy that we have a president who's trying to stop wars and prevent them instead of start them? And I just don't get it. I really don't. Other than the fact that it's Donald J. Trump. If this was a Democrat that was doing this, everyone would be saying, well, he's on his way to the Nobel Peace Prize. This is absurd. We are trying to end a war. You cannot end a war unless both sides come to the table, starting with the Russians.

[00:08:05] And that is the point the president has made. And we have to do whatever we can to try to bring them to the table to see if it's even possible. I'm not promising you it's possible. I'm not telling you it's 90 percent likely. I'm saying it's zero percent likely if we don't get them to a negotiating table.

[00:08:21] And the sooner everyone grows up around here and figures out that this is a bad war that's heading in a bad direction with death and destruction and all kinds of dangers surrounding it that could spiral into a broader conflict, the sooner people grow up and realize that, I think the more progress we're going to be able to make. But the president's crystal clear. He campaigned on it and he's going to govern on it. And that is he is going to be a president that tries to achieve peace. And he has been very clear. This is a war that would have never happened had Donald Trump been in the White House. And it needs to end. And we're going to do everything we can to end it.

[00:08:51] In an enduring and sustainable and fair way. Got an email here from JM who says, I'm old enough to remember when Trump did not want Europe to become reliant on Russian gas and would not allow that pipeline to go forward. And he was laughed at for saying it. Within the first few months of Biden's administration, that pipeline was approved. And now here we are. Let me go over and talk to Bain. Welcome to the program, Bain. How are you? Hey, doing great, Pete. Question.

[00:09:19] If Europe gets involved, then boots on the ground assets. Would Russia cut them off from oil? That's a that's tough to know because I think they need the money, you know, but it definitely would be a pressure point that they could apply. Absolutely. They could they could shut down oil exports into Europe and freeze them out, starve them. Right. Like that's the thing, too. Europe has deindustrialized.

[00:09:44] They can't they can't build enough equipment for this kind of a lengthy military operation. Not right now. Right. And then the second question, let's just say they do that in Russia needs to sell. Would we buy? Would we buy? Yeah. I don't think so, because under Trump, like oil production is cranking up now. I think now we we just surpassed Saudi Arabia again.

[00:10:12] So, yeah, like so I don't know if we would. But no, that would Europe needs to find another source for their energy, whether they do it, you know, locally, whether they build more nuclear plants or something or, you know, they go, you know, fossil fuel or whatever. They they need to get energy independent from Russia. Otherwise, yeah. Otherwise, I don't understand the game that they're playing right now. I really don't understand the the strategy. But, yeah. Yeah, I don't either. Not at all. Thanks, man. All right, Bane.

[00:10:42] Appreciate it. No, it's a it's a conundrum for them. Right. When you decarbonize and you shut off your fossil fuel energy production plants and you think green energy is going to get you there and then, oh, lo and behold, it doesn't. You got people freezing to death. So you start importing the oil from a country that's pretty bad. That then invades one of your neighbors. And now you're going to try to talk tough. You do. They they got you by the pipelines.

[00:11:12] Here's a great idea. How about making an escape to a really special and secluded getaway in western North Carolina? Just a quick drive up the mountain and cabins of Asheville is your connection. Whether you're celebrating an anniversary, a honeymoon, maybe you want to plan a memorable proposal or get family and friends together for a big old reunion. Cabins of Asheville has the ideal spot for you where you can reconnect with your loved ones and the things that truly matter.

[00:11:37] Nestled within the breathtaking 14,000 acres of the Pisgah National Forest, their cabins offer a serene escape in the heart of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Centrally located between Asheville and the entrance of the Great Smoky Mountain National Park, it's the perfect balance of seclusion and proximity to all the local attractions. With hot tubs, fireplaces, air conditioning, smart TVs, Wi-Fi, grills, outdoor tables, and your own private covered porch.

[00:12:02] Choose from 13 cabins, 6 cottages, 2 villas, and a great lodge with 11 king-sized bedrooms. Cabins of Asheville has the ideal spot for you for any occasion. And they have pet-friendly accommodations. Call or text 828-367-7068. Or check out all there is to offer at cabinsofashville.com and make memories that'll last a lifetime.

[00:12:26] According to Lucas Tomlinson at Fox News, only five NATO countries out of the 32 spend more than 3% of their GDP on defense. The United States, Poland, Estonia, Latvia, and Greece. Poland has a larger military than Germany. And it's not even close. I think you could also throw in the UK on that too. And Poland's army is still bigger than both of those combined.

[00:12:53] So this idea that they're going to secure the peace or something, a security agreement by the Europeans, while they're buying their oil from Russia, and don't have a military to actually do this with. I mean, it's a bold strategy, Cotton. We'll see if it works out for them. Mike, welcome to the program, Mike. Hey, Pete. How you been? I'm all right. Long time no talk.

[00:13:22] I know it has been a long time. I know that you want to be accurate with your information to your audience, and you take that quite seriously. And that's why I'm calling in. You were reporting from this guy from hot air or whatever. Talked about this secret meeting with the Democrats prior to going over to the White House. He never called it a secret meeting. Well, okay, a secret meeting. No, no, no. It wasn't a secret meeting. He literally tweeted a picture of it. Gotcha.

[00:13:51] But that was not a meeting with Democrats. That was a bipartisan meeting, including Republicans as well. I know Lindsey Graham was there. The guy that's on the Armed Services Committee, what's his name? Wickler, I think, from Mississippi. And Charles Grassley was there. They were all there. In fact, the guy Wickler also tweeted out after the meeting, very complimentary to Zelensky. The difference is he deleted that tweet after this, you know, the meeting at the White House.

[00:14:17] So it's inaccurate to suggest that somehow Zelensky is meeting with these partisan Democrats prior to going to the White House. That's inaccurate. I knew he would not want to do that. What do you think about the conversations that he apparently had also with, like, Susan Rice and Antony Blinken? What about that? I'm not familiar with those conversations, but those are...

[00:14:46] Have you heard that reported, that they had conversations with them, with Zelensky, before the White House meeting also? They're both longtime diplomats that have great experience. But they're not our diplomats now. What do you think about the Logan Act? You have to inform me on that. The Logan Act? Yeah.

[00:15:08] That was the thing that they wanted a lot of Trump aides advisors that were coming in back in 2016. I think General Mike Flynn was one of them. They wanted Trump people prosecuted for Logan Act violations, for acting as spokespeople or diplomats for America that were not actually, you know, empowered or authorized to do any kind of negotiations or anything like that.

[00:15:34] Like, there's usually talk about the Logan Act whenever a Republican talks with a foreign leader. So do you think that these people that are talking to Zelensky and you think maybe Logan Act violations worth pursuing there? Well, if you go all the way back to 2016, one thing that we can talk about is, you know, the term Russian hoax is a real misnomer. It's not. Oh, yes, it is. No. All you have to do is look at the Mueller report.

[00:16:02] Even though he talks about Zelensky, doesn't mean there's not a whole ton of connections. There's not a whole ton of Trump people and a whole ton of people in Russia. Yeah, that doesn't. No, the hoax was that Donald Trump was some sort of an asset for Russia. And that's that has never been proven. There's never been anything close to that being proven.

[00:16:26] And then the attempted proof, the Steele dossier, has been completely dismantled for the oppo research hit that it was. And it was just a fabrication. What Donald Trump and talk radio often talk about in terms of a Russian hoax is there's nothing there to see. There isn't. In fact, there is plenty of coordination. Like what? Alpha Bank? Do you believe the Alpha Bank story?

[00:16:55] Well, let's just start with Paul Manafort. Yeah. I was against the campaign. Yeah, no. So what exactly is the allegation with Paul Manafort? And talk about Mike Clinton as well. No, no, no. Talk about one at a time, Mike. Throw one out and let's talk about that one. In fact, I will put you on hold because I have to go to the news. And I will talk with you about Paul Manafort, a man who, by the way, I said Trump world should not have brought on board at the time. I made the argument against Paul Manafort.

[00:17:23] But I'm curious what you think the Paul Manafort story is. All right. If you're listening to this show, you know I try to keep up with all sorts of current events. And I know you do, too. And you probably heard me say, get your news from multiple sources. Why? Well, because it's how you detect media bias, which is why I've been so impressed with Ground News. It's an app and it's a website and it combines news from around the world in one place. So you can compare coverage and verify information.

[00:17:50] You can check it out at check.ground.news slash Pete. I put the link in the podcast description, too. I started using Ground News a few months ago and more recently chose to work with them as an affiliate because it lets me see clearly how stories get covered and by whom. The Blind Spot feature shows you which stories get ignored by the left and the right. See for yourself. Check.ground.news slash Pete.

[00:18:17] Subscribe through that link and you'll get 15% off any subscription. I use the Vantage plan to get unlimited access to every feature. Your subscription then not only helps my podcast, but it also supports Ground News as they make the media landscape more transparent. This is the Vantage plan.

[00:19:01] You want to watch the series, get answers to the most commonly asked questions on domestic violence and relationship wellness. Go to WBT.com. All right. So Mike said that he could not hang on. He had to he had to go. He had an appointment he had to go to. So we're not going to be able to. And to pick it back up with the the Paul Manafort example that he threw out. And then another one. See, here's the thing. What I find. So he said, well, let me say this.

[00:19:29] At the time I was on the air doing the afternoon show up in Asheville, three to six. And I was there during the entire first Trump term. And so when all of the investigations were going on, the impeachments and all that stuff, I was covering all of that stuff. And I would I read the Mueller report. I read through. Right. The indictments of the foreign Russians and stuff. We read through the whole transcript of the perfect phone call. We actually did a theatrical production of it.

[00:19:58] So I'm I'm I was like, well, I'm not I have forgotten a lot of the stuff, I'm sure, by now. But at the time I knew all of the the information. The problem is the story has developed over the course of eight years. And so you learn little tidbits here and there. But in totality, the Russian hoax was the narrative that Democrats advanced through the intelligence agencies and the media that Donald Trump was a Russian asset.

[00:20:28] And that was not true. That was a hoax. And the only thing that you can point to is Paul Manafort because of the lobbying or not lobbying the political consulting work that he did for. What was the guy's name? Poroshenko or something like that. The deposed. I think that I think that the deposed president of Ukraine, right, the guy that got tossed out, which angered Russia, by the way, because he was too close to Russia.

[00:20:57] And I said at the time, like, you're not doing yourselves any favor, Trump world, by bringing in people that have these connections to Russia. When you got the Democrats claiming that you're too close to Russia, I have never seen evidence that links directly Donald Trump to anything approximating a status of an asset. It's absurd.

[00:21:26] It's absurd that half the country still thinks this. A majority of Democrats believe that Russia affected the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. They don't know how. Some of them believe that they went in there and changed the vote tallies on machines. Talk about conspiracy theorists. That did not happen.

[00:21:47] Or was it the Facebook ad buy by the IRA, not the Irish Republican Army, but the Internet Research Agency, right? They dropped like $100,000 on Facebook ads that didn't get any reach, didn't influence anybody's votes that can anywhere be measured. $100,000. Now, we also know that Russia was funding pro-Hillary stuff, too.

[00:22:15] In fact, they did one right here in Charlotte. Did you know that? The Russians funded a Black Lives Matter march right here in Charlotte. And helped a local organizer put together a march. It was not well attended. But I think, and it was like Black Matters or Black Matters Live, I think, something like that. Which sounds like, it sounds like a Russian. Black Matters Live, yes. You know, whatever.

[00:22:46] And the guy talked about, like how he met the woman who was like helping him get this thing going. And she was Russian. And then there was this like big dude with no neck that was with her the whole time and never spoke any words, you know. Like that was the, that was her guard or whatever. So, the Russians try to sow chaos. Because anything they can do to create chaos here benefits them.

[00:23:16] And so, again, like Hillary Clinton and her campaign with the Mark Elias law firm, Perkins Coie, right? And the guys in the intelligence agencies, right? They were the ones that advanced this lie. That's the Russia hoax. And if you have evidence that Donald Trump is actually an asset of the KGB or the modern iteration of it, sure, go ahead and bring it.

[00:23:44] But it's just ridiculous. At this point, it is ridiculous. It was Democrat oppo research. It was Democrat opposition, was it the wrap-up smear is what Nancy Pelosi called it. All right. So, Marco Rubio, he then, talking about this Ukraine deal, he went on with Caitlin Collins on CNN.

[00:24:12] And he said the media has not seen everything that led up to the on-camera questioning that occurred in the Oval Office on Friday. The president's been very clear. He campaigned on this. He thinks this war should have never started. He believes, and I agree, that had he been president, it never would have happened. Now here we are. He's trying to bring an end to this conflict. We've explained very clearly what our plan is here, which is we want to get the Russians to a negotiating table. We want to explore whether peace is possible. They understand this.

[00:24:40] They also understand that this agreement that was supposed to be signed today was supposed to be an agreement that binds America economically to Ukraine, which to me, as I've explained, and I think the president alluded to today, is a security guarantee in its own way because we're involved. It's not us. It's our interests. That was all explained. That was all understood. And nonetheless, for the last 10 days and every engagement we've had with the Ukrainians, there's been complications in getting that point across, including the public statements that President Zelensky has made. But they insisted on coming to D.C.

[00:25:10] This agreement could have been signed five days ago, but they insisted on coming to Washington. And it should have been a very clear understanding. Don't come here and create a scenario where you're going to start lecturing us about how diplomacy isn't going to work. President Zelensky took it in that direction, and it ended in a predictable outcome as a result. Right. This minerals deal is a security guarantee in its own way.

[00:25:35] This has been their message, and it apparently is not getting through Zelensky's thick skull for whatever reason. He's being advised not to. I don't know. Look, I'm not going to ascribe motive. People are like, oh, he doesn't want to give up power because then they're going to have elections and he'll lose. I don't know any of that to be true. I have no idea what's in the guy's mind.

[00:25:54] All I know is what they're saying, what our administration is saying is that this deal puts us on the ground in Ukraine with an economic interest. That provides a level of security in and of itself. And for some reason, they're unwilling to see it that way. Rubio said it wasn't supposed to be this way.

[00:26:23] Trump has consistently said his objective here is to end the war. The way you bring it to an end is you get Russia to the table to talk. And he understands that attacking Putin, no matter how anyone may feel about him personally, forcing the president into a position where you're trying to goad him into attacking Putin, calling him names, maximalist demands about Russia having to pay for the reconstruction, all the sorts of things that you talk about in a negotiation.

[00:26:49] Well, when you start talking about that aggressively and the president's a dealmaker, he's made deals his entire life. You're not going to get people to the table. And so you start to perceive that maybe Zelensky doesn't want a peace deal. He says he does, but maybe he doesn't. And that active, open undermining of efforts to bring about peace is deeply frustrating for everyone who's been involved in communications with them leading up to today. And I think we should apologize for wasting our time for a meeting that was going to end the way it did.

[00:27:15] Right. By the way, if Donald Trump is a Russian asset and he's just doing Putin's bidding, why did he give all the javelins to Ukraine? See, here's the thing about Democrats opposing Donald Trump on whatever it is he's trying to do. Sometimes he's trying to do something that might be good. Right. Donald Trump might be trying to actually get some kind of a peace deal done between Ukraine and Russia.

[00:27:44] And all I'm hearing from the Democrats is orange man bad. Putin asset. Right. Bootlicker for Putin. And. We should just keep giving Ukraine. Whatever it demands. But here's the thing. When Joe Biden was president. He said the same thing Trump is saying right now.

[00:28:08] In fact, here's an NBC report about the frustration Joe Biden had with Zelensky. So in this conversation, President Biden called President Zelensky to tell him about a roughly one billion dollar package of additional equipment and weapons for the Ukrainian military coming from the United States. During the course of the call, President Zelensky continued, according to a number of officials who we spoke with who are familiar with the call.

[00:28:33] President Zelensky continued to talk about the additional equipment and weapons and support that he and his military needed. According to these officials, they said that President Biden finally just got frustrated and lost his temper and told President Zelensky, look, you could be a little bit more grateful. The reason that this story is is is interesting to us and is something that we are reporting on and officials are speaking to us about is because it shows that all these months ago,

[00:29:00] President Biden already realized that there was going to be a point where the American people, members of Congress, where people would start start potentially pushing back on all these billions and billions of dollars of aid and equipment that the U.S. has been providing to Ukraine. And he knew that the narrative out there needed to be that the Ukrainian people and President Zelensky were grateful for it. Interesting. So there's a bit of a track record here.

[00:29:29] Trump has said, Rubio told Caitlin Collins on CNN, that Trump has said the U.S. approach in these negotiations is to trust but verify. He's not going to get suckered into a bad deal, Rubio says. We have to explore whether peace is possible. I've said this repeatedly. I don't know. I think it is based on what they've said so far. But we have to explore that. How else is this war going to end? I ask people, what is the European plan to end this war?

[00:29:55] I can tell you what one foreign minister told me, and I'm not going to say who it was, but I can tell you what one of them told me. And that is that the war goes on for another year. And at that point, Russia will feel so weakened that they'll beg for a peace. That's another year of killing, another year of dying, another year of destruction. And by the way, not a very realistic plan in my point of view. So if there's a chance of peace, even if it's a 1% chance, that needs to be explored. And that's what President Trump is trying to do here.

[00:30:19] He also pointed out that Zelensky was in the Oval Office to sign simply a minerals rights deal. After having discussed this repeatedly, deliberately appear to be geared towards making the argument that peace is not possible. You know, again, I turn to the he turns to the vice president. What kind of diplomacy are you talking about? Almost as if to say these people, you can't deal with them. We can't you can't have any negotiations with Putin because he can't be trusted. And you're just wasting your time on negotiations.

[00:30:46] Well, he's directly basically undermining everything the president has told him he's trying to do. Look, there's no need for that. You start to suspect. Does he really want an end to this war? Does he just think that, you know, we have to do whatever he says and give him anything he wants without any endgame? That was the Biden strategy. That was the Biden strategy. We were funding a stalemate. We were funding a meat grinder. And unfortunately for the Ukrainians, the Russians have more meat to grind and they don't care about human life. We've seen it human waves, the North Koreans, etc.

[00:31:14] And so this is a very complex thing. It's very delicate. It's very costly. It's it's very bloody. It needs to be brought to an end, but it isn't going to be brought to an end with public pronouncements and maximalist demands in the public. But in real diplomacy, the vice president was right. Right. Right. It's a math problem. The Russians have more nukes and more people. To keep the fighting going.

[00:31:41] Unless you are going to go to war with Russia, a nuclear power, unless you're going to do that, then you want to find some way. To stop the war. That's the calculation here. Rubio said Trump knows that the key is to first get Russia to the negotiating table and you don't get people to the table by calling them names. Ultimately, that is the job of the State Department. The State Department doesn't fight wars. It ends them. It tries to end them.

[00:32:10] And that's usually, by the way, celebrated. I mean, I mean, throughout history, I've watched presidents to bring about an end of wars and conflicts and people celebrate that. They applaud it. I think we should be very proud and happy that we have a president whose prime objective is not to get into wars, but to prevent wars and to get out of wars. That is a very noble, laudable goal. Everyone should be applauding it.

[00:32:30] And he should be given the space to do that, not undermined by demands that he call Putin names or that we say things that impede the ability to conduct real diplomacy, as the vice president said today. Rubio also said Trump should be given the space to try to get a deal done. And when you see efforts to impede it, when you deliberate, when you tell someone, don't say, let's not talk about these things. Let's not go in this direction because it makes it harder for us to engage. And they insist on doing it anyways. You start to wonder. You start to wonder.

[00:32:59] I don't like to impugn people's motives, but you start to wonder what's behind it. So, look, again, let's hope that this can be salvaged. But I'm not sure after today. You don't believe that this can be, you're not sure that this can be salvaged? I mean, can this relationship between Zelensky and Trump be repaired, in your view? I think anything is possible. But it has to go back to the point that President Trump is interested in being involved in this for the purposes of bringing about an enduring and lasting peace. That's what he wants to achieve.

[00:33:25] And I think if I'm a country that's involved in a war with a bigger country, who's losing thousands of people, who's had three million people leave my country because they can't be there, who is facing these challenges, I would be thanking a president who's trying to help bring about an end to this war. I would be thanking him, and I would be supportive of what he's trying to do, at least in my public pronouncements and in my public posture. And we didn't see that today, and we haven't seen that for the last few days. Now, will that change? I hope so.

[00:33:52] It should for the purposes of global peace and stability in Europe and around the world. This is the thing. This war has now gone on for three years, right? They're essentially at a stalemate, as Rubio called it, meat grinder. What is the exit strategy for Ukraine? Do you have a plan here?

[00:34:20] Or is the plan to just publicly pressure other countries to go throw more meat into the grinder, their own meat? Is that the idea? Rubio said there is no end in sight to this war, nor is there an exit strategy. The EU doesn't have an exit strategy. I saw the comments tonight from the leader of the EU saying there needs a new leader of the free world. I mean, these people are just playing silly games and saying these things. What is their exit strategy? What is anybody else's exit strategy?

[00:34:47] The only person on the planet who is actively trying to bring an end to this conflict is named Donald Trump, the president of the United States. He's the only one that's trying to do it, and we should be helping him to achieve it. And so do I think it's possible? Yeah, I hope it's possible because that's what we do try to do at the Department of State is we try to bring in the conflict, not start new ones and certainly not extend them. Right. At this point, it seems like the exit strategy is to wait for Putin to die or for them to just lose interest in fighting.

[00:35:15] That's the only, like, I don't know anything. I've not even heard any kind of an attempt to explain an exit strategy on this. All right, that'll do it for this episode. Thank you so much for listening. I could not do the show without your support and the support of the businesses that advertise on the podcast. So if you'd like, please support them, too, and tell them you heard it here. You can also become a patron at my Patreon page or go to thepetecalendorshow.com.

[00:35:42] Again, thank you so much for listening, and don't break anything while I'm gone.