New Poll: US Support For Ukraine Continues To Evaporate
A new AP/NORC poll shows that support among Americans - of all political persuasion - for continued involvement in the Russia/Ukraine war continues to crater, suggesting increasing political risk for politicians who continue to toe the Biden Administration line. Also today: UN Security Council will take up allegations that the US blew up Nord Stream pipeline. Finally: A secret Fauci meeting on natural immunity? Damar Hamlin declines to say what stopped his heart.
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today, we have Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you on Thursday?
Doing well, doing well.
Excellent.
And we're going to start off with a little bit of good news.
Yeah.
Yeah, a little bit of persuasion, but it's too slow.
It is so unnecessary.
We shouldn't have to be worrying about these things.
How can we get the American people to be less excited about going to war in Ukraine?
That's sort of the question.
Why do they do it?
Anyway, you keep up with the polls.
You like polling numbers.
You must have taken a lot of math and statistics and things.
Only when they go our way.
That's the only time I like it.
Okay, but the polls have been shifting.
We've had some reports here in the last couple months, and it's been slow in coming against a really good polling on COVID.
But it looks like the shift in public attitude that the deep state's allowed to get out into the media.
It isn't only a few of us reporting on this.
This is getting into the regular media, and this is an AP polling thing that we want to talk about.
And we have had several polls, but the direction is important.
There's less and less enthusiasm by the American people for going to war and continuing this war in Ukraine.
Now, I would say, well, it's less than perfect.
It doesn't have the same arguments we have.
A little bit of pragmatism, but the pragmatism is worthwhile, and that diminishes the warmongers.
And that is the pragmatism, the American people are disgusted with it because they've sensed what they should sense from the history of the world at all time, is that wars don't go well.
And they're hurtful to the average person.
And this is what they're saying.
The average person now, when they're polled, they say, what's going on here?
Almost a trillion dollars we've sent over there.
And we keep sending it and they're talking about it.
And Biden says, we're going to stay there until we have total victory and the Russians have gone home and that sort of thing.
But the people are saying, well, maybe not.
We have enough problems.
And they're starting, it's a reflection that our economy is not nearly as rosy as the reports are on television because they always say, oh, there's not that much inflation.
It's getting better.
And all that double talk that they have.
But anyway, the people are shifting to saying enough is enough.
Maybe we want to help them a little bit.
We certainly from the beginning didn't want to send troops, but they were sending a lot of money and a lot of weapons, cost a lot of money.
And guess what?
There's neglect of some of the problems we have in this country.
Where's the buckets of money?
Oh, well, sorry, we can't do that.
We sent all the buckets of money to Ukraine.
But I'd like to look it up and find out how much good we did, but we can't find the money.
Who benefited by that?
Oh, there's a little bit of corruption over there, and people stole it, which is natural in all the wars.
I've always argued against foreign aid because nobody has audits of foreign aid.
And it usually ends up into bad people who are the enemies that we're trying to restrain.
But anyway, this little poll shows that the shift is in the direction.
The American people are getting tired, and we want to encourage them.
This is bad news for the Biden administration and for the Republicans, the mainline Republican Party, which has always been pro-war.
has never seen a war it doesn't like because it shows the continued moving away from support for this war.
We can put up this, this just came out yesterday.
They've been tracking this from the very beginning, almost a year ago.
Ukraine aid support softens in the U.S. AP Nork poll.
Now, one of the things we talked about just before the show started, AP has been very, very pro-Ukraine and very, very pro-war.
So it must physically pain them to support, to show this absolutely shrinking support.
And if we can put on the next clip, this tells you just in numbers what's happening.
48% say they favor U.S. providing weapons to Ukraine, with 29 opposing, 22 saying neither.
So less than half of Americans now support sending weapons into Ukraine.
That's down from May of 22, when 60% of Americans were in favor.
So from almost two-thirds majority down to a minority approving sending more weapons to Ukraine.
And let's look at some of the, oh, hold on.
Americans are about evenly divided on sending government funds.
Only 30% in favor of sending money to Ukraine.
38% opposed.
And this is all Americans.
This is the Biden people who love this.
All Americans.
So support is disintegrating across the board.
Let's do the next one and look at some of these numbers.
Now, I apologize.
If I had drawn the chart, I would have tried to make it a little bit more easy.
Maybe I'm not that good at math.
But these were questions asked about what should be a bigger priority for America in response to Russia's invasion.
One, sanctioning Russia as effectively as possible, even if it damages the economy.
Or two, limiting damage to the economy, even if it means sanctions are less effective.
And on the left, you see the tabs from March of 22, and that's when the invasion had just started.
That's when propaganda was at volume 11.
And so you see on the left side, among green is overall, blue is Democrat, and red is Republican, you see very much heavily skewed toward the left, which is sanctioning Russia as effectively as possible.
Limiting damage to the economy.
Republicans were more in favor of that, but overall you see that very much people were in favor of sanctions, sanctions, sanctions.
You move over to January 23, which is the right part of this chart, and you see that all the momentum has shifted to limiting damage to the economy.
Americans are seeing that these things are not as cost-free as they thought they were, and the tide is shifting to it.
Absolute majority.
And among Republicans, almost 70% of Republicans do not want to damage the economy for Russia.
Next tab, really quick.
Sorry, Dr. Paul, but I just wanted to get this next one in before I change.
Large partisan differences.
They always want to emphasize this.
I'm not sure about this.
Large partisan differences and confidence in Biden's ability to handle the war.
And actually, in this sense, it's true.
Because overall, only 19% of Americans have a great deal of confidence that Biden can manage this war.
And among his own party, only 40%, way less than half, think that he can handle this.
Among Republicans, only 2%, and that's Bill Kristol and his family, who believe, maybe you're not even a Republican anymore, who believe that Biden can manage this affair.
The numbers are brutal, brutal for this administration and the hawkish Republicans.
You know, in economics or in foreign policy, acceleration and momentum is very important.
And I would say the momentum is in the right direction.
So what we want to do is accelerate more and more momentum so there's more people shifting.
And I think we witnessed that and talked about it when the people were waking up about the COVID, the so-called epidemic.
So, but I think the American people, when they look at this and become more opposed to it, I think this is just a guess in a way.
They're concerned about infrastructure, building roads, and so-called legitimate government expenditures, and also the borders.
That's very real.
And they say, well, we were neglecting our borders, and they sense that.
But, you know, one thing I don't think they pay much attention to, but they ought to add one more item, and that is price inflation when the cost of living goes up.
I don't think they connect that with Ukraine as much.
But when you look at items in the budget, it's a big item because it's so big and it's so mishandled, and there's no audits.
So the military and industrial complex in bidding this up is very harmful.
So if the American people also added their concerns from the borders and other is oh, cost of living in some ways is related to spending in Ukraine, wow, maybe we can give a little acceleration to the momentum about changing those policies.
Yeah, everything has always been cost-free, at least in their mind, because as you would always say, they don't see it because it's hidden in inflation.
But now they're seeing it.
And I think every American should look at this chart because I think anyone who looked at this next chart would say, why us?
Why do we have to bear this massive burden of funding this war?
And this is a list of donors, the largest donors of military aid to Ukraine.
And if you look at this chart, you see that the U.S. financial support is off the chart by far 10 times more than Germany, the next highest level, nearly 10 times as much.
This is all coming out of our economy.
And I think Americans would say, for what?
What are we getting out of this?
The answer is nothing.
And I think this is not from that poll, but I just dug that graphic out because it shows so graphically the massive, overwhelming commitment that the United States government and the Biden administration has made to this war.
Americans are not buying it.
Well, I think there's a reason for that because they don't think about NATO the same way we think about NATO.
And what they do is they think of war, well, there's a war going on, yes, and we're involved in helping, but because the Russians invaded and they're destroying Ukraine.
Well, just that's oversimplified and wrong.
So, and here it is, when they talk about support, you know, what's NATO doing and these other countries participating, I think of you know, we should talk more about NATO, you know, disobeying their own promises about where they were going to put weapons before they provoked Russia.
So that is one thing they have to consider.
But no, they don't consider that.
And they designed a war.
It's Ukraine against Russia and the Americans help.
But I see it as when you see this, you know, NATO involvement.
Well, we're NATO.
We're NATO and we put the money in and then they avoid the subject.
But the people are right.
It's our money.
I think they're starting to realize we're providing these weapons.
And I just think it's worse than you've even thought about, mainly because it affects a lot more than infrastructure.
And even if everything the other side said is true, that Russia in an unprovoked way woke up one morning and decided to invade its neighbor, that still would not make the case for our involvement at all.
Ukraine is not a NATO member.
We have no obligation, legal or moral, to support Ukraine.
So even if the worst case scenario, that still would not make the case.
As we point out from the beginning, the claims are not correct.
There are a lot more to it than this, but even so, it wouldn't make the claim.
Well, let's move on to a related topic.
And if we can put that up, this is from Dave DeCamp at antiwar.com.
Here it has a good little summary about, and this is some more follow-out from the Seymour Hirsch article.
Russia requests UN Security Council meeting over Nord Stream report.
Seymour Hirsch, who they're doing their best to ignore, as we talked about on the show, Dr. Paul blockbuster report detailing exactly how the Biden administration blew up the pipeline.
And in light of this report, the Russians, who are members of the UN Security Council, have requested a meeting.
And this is a statement of Russia's first deputy representative to the UN.
He said, in light of new information regarding the bombing of the Nord Stream gas pipelines, we have requested a UN Security Council meeting to be held on February 22nd at 3 p.m. New York time.
And so they want the UN Security Council to get to the bottom.
This kind of tricky situation for the U.S. They've denied it.
Totally untrue.
No truth at all to it.
Kind of like they denied Hirsch's story about Abu Ghraib.
Totally untrue.
Nothing to it.
Turns out to be true.
I think they're in panic mode in Washington over this.
Yeah, and back to the emphasis, it should be that if we're trying to soften the blow and reduce the war-mongering stuff going on, they have to realize this is a war between the United States and Russia.
But no, for our benefit, and even Russia diplomatically, maybe they want to blame NATO too, but they are.
The accusations about that pipeline was just off.
And there was another threat, you know, by the Russians.
You know, yesterday I said, you know, they really haven't talked that much about it.
I'm surprised they haven't done much.
But I think there was a very explicit warning yesterday.
And this might be that they're covering themselves.
They're going to go and have their last effort with NATO and see what they do.
But we own NATO, so how can you expect this solution to come from that?
It was NATO that pushed those troops up on the Russian border, which we said we wouldn't do.
And it's us that provided all the funds.
And the unbelievable, complicated mess with the oil line that they literally went in and destroyed it.
I think, you know, yeah, oh, well, that's out in the ocean someplace, and that was for Germany.
It's nothing to do with attacking Russia.
Boy, that was like hitting Moscow almost.
I think diplomatically that's what it did.
And that's why, and that's also the reason now Blinken is sort of thinking, maybe we shouldn't demand that the Ukrainians go in there and lose a couple more 100,000 people and take back eastern Ukraine.
And he's saying, well, maybe we should just wait on that.
Well, that means there is a big concern, but it's also, Biden said he was not, he is not going to do anything and talk about any peace until they get all that land back.
So they're stalemate now.
We need this momentum.
Churn it up.
American people, wake up.
Get these people.
You know, I used to talk about bringing the troops home.
We should never send them.
And then if they do go, get them home.
And we don't need to have our special forces and our CIA and NATO forces hiding behind there, just wanting to be in the middle of another war.
I think we're still have something going on in Syria.
We left the Middle East, sort of, and now we're in Syria.
That's a big deal.
But they have oil.
But here we have to participate in this because this is a big deal.
But it's Russia.
It's Russia.
We've got to stop the Russians.
If we get tired of that or they get tired, well, we always have China.
Act of War Revelations00:06:43
Well, I'm not a big fan of what impeachment has become.
But if what Hirsch has written is accurate and true, this is a blatantly illegal act by the Biden administration.
You have committed an act of war against another country's infrastructure.
You've blown it up without the required consultation with Congress.
You know, there's a format where there's a group of members in the House and the Senate who are informed of covert actions like this before they're undertaken.
That form did not take.
That did not take place.
This was undertaken, from what we understand from Hirsch's reporting, without the notification, without the input from the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate, a blatantly illegal act of war against another country.
I think if there are any Republicans in the House with any courage, they will immediately start looking into this and looking into probably a legitimate reason to impeach the President of the United States over this.
You know, you make the point, there's no declaration of war, but that's incidental and they're not likely to be listening to you.
But the whole thing is, how do that was technologically in planning?
That took some effort.
Well, who is this?
Oh, it's mysterious.
It's called secret government.
It's called the CIA.
And don't you know, there was a coup in this country, and the CIA and the special forces do what they want, and they totally are excluded, and the media cooperates with them until the people start to wake up.
And that's why, yes, hopefully the Republicans will wake up and do more than they have in the past.
But we do know, we do know that they're divided on it as well.
And if they do something right at this moment, it's going to be slow and tedious.
But that's what has to happen.
But it isn't.
But this is, you make this point about, you know, Congress didn't give permission.
This is an act of war.
But how long have we been doing that?
You know, for what, 60-some years, you know, and we've been doing this.
And we just go about it and start another war.
And how do we start the war?
Decisions made by the CIA and they send in, but even that started before the more recent time.
In 53 is when I think this really got started and out of hand, where things were done like that.
And we live with the bad consequences of it.
And, you know, even the consequences with Iran has to do with Russia and China now that are, when the chance comes where they might be able to undermine the dollar.
And if we continue with our economic policy, it might not be too difficult to undermine the dollar.
We may do that all by ourselves.
The threshold for covert actions is much lower, of course, than an act of war.
It only requires a notification of a certain group of senators and members of the House.
And that note of, not even the, forget about act of, forget about declaration of war.
That notification didn't take place, which is illegal.
But on the UN, to finish up on that, let's skip the next one and go directly to that tweet that I had up.
This is Gonzalo Lira.
He reports on the Ukraine war from Kharkov inside Ukraine.
And he points, he made a good point.
I have to give him credit because I was going to steal it anyway.
But he makes a good point about the Russians calling for a UN Security Council hearing on this because he said this is a trap for the West.
If they agree to the UN Security Council meeting, then the U.S. will be shown to be responsible for the Nord Stream terrorist attack.
If they refuse, it will discredit the UN and show it to be a Western war justification engine.
So in a way, it's kind of a checkmate because they're kind of damned if they do and damned if they don't on this.
So it'll be really interesting to see what happens when this hearing convenes next week.
We may learn something that will be beneficial to waking up the people.
But if it's really valuable information that would help wake up the people, it will be done very quietly.
Nobody will report it.
Oh, what meeting are you guys talking about?
There was no meeting.
You guys are worried.
You worry too much.
Well, let's move on to another aspect of the deep state and put on this next clip because here is the dark figure on our horizon for years.
This is a report that came out earlier this month in the Epoch Times.
Inside the secret government meeting on COVID-19 natural immunity, there was a meeting convoked by Fauci and his top aides to discuss the issue of whether people who've had COVID, if that counts as one of their shots.
Fascinating, and it's fascinating that it was done in secret.
This should be a scientific inquiry.
Instead, it looked like a political discussion.
You know, some people wanted to make an excuse, say, well, they're just stupid.
They didn't get the right education in medical school.
But I think the contest for explaining this is, are they stupid?
Is this why they did that?
And they didn't really, they really believed this stuff.
The pharmaceutical industry said, well, you don't have to worry about natural immunity.
That doesn't really exist.
Or the other choice is they're evil.
Yeah.
And the odds of evilness is greater than the stupidity.
But what happens if you combine them?
And that is what's happening.
But the whole idea that they had this meeting, I think this should be really big news to get together because we were talking about this all the time, but we had no evidence that they actually planned it.
And it wasn't an accident that all the bad guys and all the bad guys who got into bed with the government in the medical profession.
And the worst thing is the medical profession did this.
They went along with this.
Except for, you know, hopefully more and more will come out now because there were certainly some good friends on our side in the medical profession who had to suffer the consequence because they spoke out.
Yeah.
Well, on the government side who attended this secret meeting was Fauci, of course.
Dr. Vivek Murphy, who was a U.S. Surgeon General.
Rochelle Walinski, remember her, head of the CDC.
Frances Collins, head of the National Institutes of Health, and Dr. Bachara Chukault, the White House vaccine coordinator.
And they brought in outside experts, including the notorious Dr. Peter Hotez, right?
Remember him?
Tragedy and Determination00:06:04
Is that how you pronounce it?
Yeah, but what about, did Fauci get invited?
No, he was there.
Oh, yeah, okay.
Yeah.
He was there.
He probably organized it.
Yeah, yeah.
So they brought in this kook from Dallas, Hotez.
Is that his name?
And the discussion was, well, you know, and Hotez was saying, natural immunity means nothing.
You have to get all your shots, you know, Daysville to whatever.
So it was pretty amazing.
Pretty amazing.
They took a vote from Pfizer.
They had a couple extra votes.
And Pfizer's, well, our bottom line.
What do you think we're doing?
Do you think we're doing this out of generosity?
We have a bottom line.
We have stockholders to satisfy.
What a mess.
Well, one of the people that we followed throughout the COVID era and who gave us such great statistics, such great analysis, and we're grateful too, is Justin Hart.
And he put out a little tweet about this earlier this month, and I think it summarizes it quite well.
If we can put that up, the next one, actually, if you can.
There we go.
This is Justin Hart.
This is important.
Hotez bolstering Fauci to diminish, to dismiss natural immunity off it in Osterholm, suggesting it should have some credence.
Limit to two shots.
Hotez and Fauci are awful rogues.
So very, very good from Justin Hart to describe it.
Okay.
Here's the next story, though, and it's kind of a sad story.
And I think, if you don't mind, we'll start with a video clip.
Okay.
And this is the football player, DeMar Hamlin, who's dramatically on Monday Night Football, his heart stopped.
Now, he's talking to Michael Strahan, who's a football legend, legend.
And Strahan is now a journalist, and he's asking him, what happened, DeMar?
What happened?
Let's listen into that first 31 or so seconds.
From the ICU, the question on so many minds, what caused his heart to stop beating?
You're 24, peak physical condition.
Could run a circle around me right now.
How did doctors describe what happened to you?
I said, I'm not with a standard phone.
I know from Mike.
That's dramatic, isn't it, Dr. Paul?
That's silence is sometimes dramatic.
Facial expression, yeah, yeah.
What do you make of it?
Sad.
I'm sad.
Other people will be sad.
It's a tragedy, but all it's going to do is get people more determined that they want to know the truth about this.
Because if the truth is that they have evidence that he had myocarditis and it's the same type of myocarditis that comes from booster shots, that would be such a horrendous problem and publicity.
And yet, some people still around believe that truth is the thing that you have to bring out.
And can you imagine how Hamilton, in the position that he's in, you know, he's sick, he's had trouble, he's recovering, and his loyalties are to football and everything else.
They put him in a predicament physically and mentally.
To me, it's just sad.
And yet, we don't know the answer.
There's enough people now who are very suspicious that if they have any evidence that I think they would have evidence if he has myocarditis, you know, with all the equipment they have and the ultrasounds and things that they can do, they could find out if it's myocarditis and similar to what other people have had.
How long would they do this?
So there's no easy answer.
You think about the sympathy and empathy that everybody has for the football player.
It's just so tragic.
But I think eventually people are going to know and they're going to be very unhappy, but they won't be able to do anything because the longer they wait, people have short memories and all.
But that is so sad.
Yeah.
The thing, I don't know if you have the same impression.
When I saw him pausing and pausing, to me it looked like fear.
It looked like he was afraid to answer the question.
Yeah, I think it is.
You know, it was probably that in combination that he's recovering from a very serious illness and whether it was all intellectual slowness or intellectually positive in, boy, this is a tough one.
Hamada do it.
It's almost like maybe he should have not taken the interview, you know, because he was put in the box in a dilemma.
Like, you know, if they're going to ask me what I know, he probably, you know, the doctors are supposed to tell patients, but in this day, today, if they could deny natural immunity, believe me, they can conspire to deny information to patients.
And that to me would be a great tragedy.
But medicine has been under such vicious attacks, you know, over the controls over COVID.
That is a sad story, too.
How many doctors rolled over and did what they told?
And the patient suffered from it.
Yeah, very sad.
Well, I'm going to go ahead and close out if you think you're ready, Dr. Paul.
And if we can just skip to that very last clip, because I will remind our viewers, this will be our last live show before Dr. Paul and I pile into our pickup truck and drive up, no, pile onto our plane and drive up to Washington, D.C. for the Rage Against the War Machine rally, February 19th on Sunday.
Rage Against the War Machine00:01:56
We urge everyone who can to make this a very, very large rally.
Make it something they cannot deny.
Make it something they cannot pretend does not exist.
The lineup of speakers ranges across the spectrum of political views in this country, all gathered together to rage against the war machine.
And the epicenter of the war machine is Washington, D.C., so it's an appropriate location.
We're looking forward to it.
Very good.
And we'll be hoping we have a couple people come because there are some other good speakers, you know.
There are a lot of great speakers.
So, you know, this is something that, of course, I've talked about a whole lot.
Most people know that I started into medicine.
I started into politics when I was a medical doctor.
And I just got fascinated with economics and the monetary system, that sort of thing, and the Federal Reserve.
And then I got involved because I found out that economics is very much involved in our foreign policy.
And then I had somebody talk me into signing up and running for president.
And that's a mixed bag.
I didn't quite make that one.
But one of the lines that I used in those speeches that I gave, which was very popular, bring the troops home because we were in the midst of the Far East War.
How do you solve the problem?
They'd be very blunt.
What do you do?
What do you do?
Even if you want to bring it home, how do you do it?
We just marched in.
We can just march out.
And that was well received.
But I'm going to modify it.
I might even end up modifying it in my speech.
Is not so much we just marched in, we just marched out.
I'm going to say, let's not march in unless it's proper, constitutional, moral, and makes some sense.
And then we wouldn't have to face all these problems that we have.