All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 7, 2023 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
31:26
Game Over: Majority Of All Americans Oppose More Aid To Ukraine

The pro-war and pro-Biden CNN has just released a poll that must have been painful for them: Americans across the board, whether Democrat or Republican or independent, whether liberal or conservative, now say they do NOT approve of any further US aid to Ukraine. As Ukraine has been Biden's signature foreign policy issue, what does this mean as we move into election season? Also today - can Trump get a venue change?

|

Time Text
Poll Reveals War Fatigue 00:15:33
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today is Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you.
Happy Monday, Dr. Paul.
How are you today?
Doing fine, doing fine.
Ready to go.
Ready for cooler weather, though.
Yeah, yeah.
But we can't complain.
You know, it's probably a very natural thing.
Having heat in the summertime.
Imagine that.
And most people I've seen working around in the heat, you know, they're surviving quite well.
But anyway, we'll let somebody else figure out who's causing all this bad weather because I grew up at a time it was always Russia.
That's right.
But Russia wouldn't do that now.
But today, we want to start off with talking about, you know, a movement in numbers statistics because we like to see if they're coming close to what we're thinking about.
They're coming like our direction or going away from us.
And one thing we talked about for a good bit, not a couple weeks or a couple months, but a couple years, we've been very much involved in talking about the Ukrainian war that's going on, the NATO U.S. war against Ukraine.
And that's been going on for a long time now.
And it seems like there's always some war going on.
If there was a surrender to tomorrow and they all marched out of Ukraine, they'd find a place to go.
Probably Tyler or something.
But anyway, this attitude that we have, our foreign policy, there are a lot of problems around the world.
A lot of countries are guilty of problems.
And there's a lot of authoritarianism that contributes to it.
But overall, there's a lot of people who get sort of tired of it.
But our foreign policy, we have a much more moral obligation to complain about, especially when I was in office.
I assumed more of an obligation to talk about and try to change some of those attitudes and the policies that we have.
So far, not much has happened except one event, and we've talked about this already, is sort of a subtle shift.
Democrats are more hawkish, and Republicans still hawkish.
They're wild people too, but they're backing off a little bit.
And the numbers of people in the Republican Party are starting to change.
And that's what this poll showed.
First off, the poll is a CNN.
So you can't say it's just a fudged figure if it's going to disagree with some of the things going on.
But the CNN poll says majority of Americans oppose more U.S. aid for Ukraine in war with Russia.
So that's good.
And we'd like them to, I would like to expand that.
More Americans are opposed to interference in the affairs, in the internal affairs of all nations of the world.
We ought to come home and mind our own business.
Yeah, that would be a good one.
Well, we can put on that first one.
This came out over the weekend, just before the weekend.
And it's very, very important for a number of reasons, I think.
First of all, and you mentioned it when we started talking about this, it's notable because of where it appeared.
It was a CNN poll.
And CNN, of course, is definitely in the Biden camp.
That's pretty obvious.
And they love this war like they love all wars.
This must have been agonizing for them to publish the results of this poll.
As you say, CNN poll, majority of Americans oppose more U.S. aid for Ukraine.
If we go to the next one here, some of the numbers that are important about this poll.
Overall, 55% of those polled say the U.S. Congress should not authorize additional funding to support Ukraine.
Only 45% say they should authorize more funding.
That's a very, very clear margin among all Americans asked.
The other comparison is only 48% believe that the U.S. should do more to help Ukraine.
And that is down from 62% last February.
So the numbers have completely gone the other way.
And that's just overall, Dr. Paul.
If you go to the next one, among Republicans, it's even more dramatic.
Republicans broadly say that Congress should not authorize new funding.
71%.
71% of Republicans, Dr. Paul, say not another penny for Ukraine.
I wonder, excuse me, if the politicians are paying attention to this.
Well, we'll try.
You know, the one thing about this, this is a good poll, and we're looking at it, and we're trying to get some information out of it.
But it's to me disgusting because what they're talking about is not should we be there and how do we get there?
It's all in degrees.
Should we cut off the money or give them more money?
Should we cut off the weapons and test our weapons over there?
Should we build the allies?
Should we be supporting money to NATO because NATO is our friend?
It's all in degrees.
And then they say, should we have troops or no troops?
Oh, no, we don't want any troops because people don't like that.
But we'll send the CIA and we'll send special forces there.
So it's all degrees of interference.
And they're not narrowing down to what I think is important is why are we there?
What are we doing there?
And what about our foreign policy?
When did we decide we had an empire?
And when did we decide the moral authority to tell everybody what to do?
And a lot of lives have been lost during my own lifetime because, you know, I was born in 35.
We had World Wars, Korean War, Vietnam Wars, and then Middle East wars.
We've had wars in Ukraine, Syria, and they're ongoing.
And as we try to wind them down, guess what?
These people stirring up trouble.
Confrontation with Taiwan and China.
So it's an attitude that eventually has to be addressed.
Yeah, yeah, that's for sure.
Well, pardon me.
I'm sorry, put on this next one if you can, because, I mean, I think what we see here is a massive, massive shift in American political perception.
Because if you remember, Dr. Paul, it wasn't that long ago, what I'm a conservative Republican means I like all the wars.
And now you're seeing a shift and you're seeing it in this poll.
And of course, obviously, we don't want to overread this because this is just one poll.
However, if you look at this one, within both parties, there are splits by ideology.
So not just among the party, but among ideology within the party.
So on the question of providing additional funding, liberal Democrats are far and away the most supportive.
74% of liberal Democrats want more money for Ukraine, with 51% of moderates or conservative Democrats.
Now listen to this.
Among Republicans, about three quarters of conservatives oppose new funding.
76%.
Over three in four people who self-identify as conservatives say, we're sick of this war, we're sick of the funding in this war, we want no more of it.
I think that's such an important thing that candidates should pay attention to.
You know, I see that as a sign of people's attitudes needing to be looked at because in order to have what they're talking about in that statistic, there's a lot less activity going on there.
But the big thing is, is when is that going to start?
And this might be a starter here.
But the thing is, they get us into these wars and they get the people excited.
And then you have, we talk about the Democrats and others and also the military-industrial complex.
But the media has a lot to do with Chan churning up this aggression.
And that's been going on for a long time.
And now I used to think, well, it was definitely different in World War I and World War II.
But the more you study this history, the more you identify the same people, group of people, the same philosophy, doing the same thing.
And I keep thinking, I was so sad when I read the thorough explanation of the effort made before World War II to try to get Roosevelt to talk to a top diplomat in Japan where the people who were representing him, the true diplomats, wanted to do it.
All they did, they both were begging.
Japan, but they wouldn't do it.
So that's what it has to be done.
It has to be done a little sooner.
So, but little bits and pieces.
So when we see a positive, we want to mention it.
Yeah, and you're right to mention media because, yes, CNN is pro-war, but Fox is no better.
Post-Tucker Carlson Fox is no better.
All of their so-called experts are massive pro-war, massive warmongers.
They come straight from the military-industrial complex.
So we don't mean to single out CNN here when it comes to cheerleading for war.
We just don't, we don't have a network, you know, those of us who are pro-American.
But I want to just go over a couple more numbers, Dr. Paul, if we can.
If you can put that next one up, because it's so important.
Now, this is on the issue of providing weapons to Ukraine.
And on that question, let me see.
Only 30% of Republicans believe we should provide weapons to Ukraine.
That means that 70%, a full 70%, 7 in 10, do not believe that we should provide weapons to Ukraine.
And barely over half, 61% of Democrats and only 39% of Independents want weapons to go to Ukraine.
And Responsible Statecraft did a couple of other dives into this, if you can put the next one on.
A couple of other things came out of this poll that are important.
53% disapproval of how Biden is handling the war in Ukraine.
56% disapprove of how he's handling Russia.
And 57% disapprove of how Biden is handling the relationship with China.
Now, to me, Dr. Paul, I don't know what you think, but when I look at those numbers, I think that opens the door for RFK to come in.
Yeah, and it must be getting closer.
He must be doing better because another member of the Kennedy family really went after him.
Oh, really?
I didn't see that.
Oh, it was just horrible, you know, what they've done to what they want to do to him.
And yet, if they had a brain, and sometimes it seems like they don't.
But especially the family, don't they know the real reasons why Jack Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy was the enemy of the establishment?
I mean, yeah, and they were they tried their best to they didn't come across shouting and and uh making a scene where do it now instantaneously.
They really tried to maneuver in a position where they had a wise position of we don't need these wars.
And and yet th now they come down hard on Robert Kennedy Jr., you know, and they're they're willing to go after him.
And that was a real sad article on it.
No one to be quiet, maybe.
He's not perfect.
So I was just looking around on Twitter and someone, and I forgot to, and I apologize who it was, but they made a good point, which is pretty obvious.
But I think this is when the neocons are the most dangerous now, when you see the public opinion definitely going against the war.
They don't like seeing that happen.
For them, it's decision time.
Whether it's time to throw someone under the bus, which could happen.
They're very good at doing that.
You can ask Gaddafi and the others about that.
Or whether they will find some other way to escalate.
Could it be a false flag?
Could it be something?
And a lot of people have speculated whether these drone strikes or attempted drone strikes over Moscow might be an attempt to get Russia to overreact, which they can then portray as look how Russia is hitting our infrastructure and that sort of thing.
So I think someone else, as I say, mentioned that, but I think it's worth saying that this is probably one of the most dangerous points when American opinion is going against the war.
Yeah, that's right.
There's going to be stirring.
And hopefully by the time the election rolls around here, the presidential election, something will be identified and there'll be clear-cut choices.
And right now, it's not that clear because even the top runner for the Republican, sometimes you're not sure where he is exactly.
So we'll have to see, but in our meager little way, we want to participate in trying to at least make it available to people.
There are different answers than what they hear.
Even now, they can't just bow to Fox News anymore.
And I hope Newsmax continues because they're offering some disagreement on some of the issues, and I think that's decent.
Yeah, good for them.
And there are a few others too.
Well, speaking of Trump, you didn't mention by name, but you mentioned by inference.
We do want to revisit some of the things we talked about on Thursday because the indictment was rather new when we talked about it.
It's kind of sunk in a little bit.
And thanks to our great friend Jonathan Turley, who's done, as usual, terrific work on this.
He has a new piece out.
If you can put the next one up, this is called, this is based on his column in the Hill.
It's called The Mind of Donald Trump: Why Proving a Lie Will Not Necessarily Secure a Conviction for Jack Smith, who's the prosecutor on this.
And Turley goes through a couple of important things.
And I mean, honestly, Dr. Paul, the more I read this, the more, on one hand, I find it insane.
On the other hand, I find it truly terrifying because what they're trying to do is make government the arbiter of truth.
And if go to that next one if you can, because this is what Turley is pointing out.
He says, Trump wasn't charged with conspiracy to incite violence or insurrection.
He was charged because he, quote, spread lies that had been outcome determinative fraud in the election and that he actually won.
And Turley goes on to say, in order to secure a conviction for this, Smith would need to bulldoze not just through the First Amendment, but also the existing case law holding that even false statements are protected speech.
So basically, he's going to have to literally destroy the First Amendment if he's going to successfully prosecute Trump.
You know, I complained a little bit about the way the Republicans approached this because it was always said by the media that they wanted to undo the election and change the election.
And that thing, that stuck.
And people say, well, he can't undo the election.
Yeah, there's always a little bit of shenanigans going on there.
But it should have been.
And then when I go back and look at some of Trump's statements, and he was pretty clear on that, we want all the votes counted.
Yeah, yeah.
You know, this is not a true Recount of the votes.
Lying and the Path to Prosecution 00:04:58
So that's where it should have been.
And that's where I think I really can't, you know, as complicated as Trump is, I just don't believe that he was involved in a true insurrection.
You know, I think he was still ideological.
He wanted to do this, but he wanted the truth out.
And I think that that's where it should be.
And that's where the biggest threat is right now.
They don't seem to really worry about it, or they would have been cautious about the new laws.
But, you know, the more I read about that thing in Arizona, it sounds like there was a lot of cheating going on in Arizona.
I'll tell you.
Be careful.
You're going to go to jail for saying that.
It's crazy.
I mean, the idea is that he should be prosecuted because even though he was lying, he knew he was lying and therefore he's culpable for it.
Whereas it's not illegal for politicians to lie, otherwise they'd all be in jail, you know, constantly.
But it's just a crazy thing.
What came to my mind is, and who is to be the judge on what's he thinking?
You know, that's crazy.
It is.
And actually, Turley has an answer for that if you put the next one up, because here's what he writes.
And as we know, and we know very, very often that Turley is by no stretch a fan of Trump at all.
He's been extremely critical.
And that gives him credibility, you know, because he criticizes, but he does stand up for the Constitution.
And go to the next one because this is where I think this is the critical part of what he wrote, Dr. Paul.
This case, which criminally targets the sitting president's leading opponent, is much more dangerous because it sets up the federal government as the arbiter of truth.
The indictment essentially charges that Trump charges Trump with not accepting the truth.
There is no limiting principle to this indictment.
The government would choose between which politicians are lying and which are lying without cause.
So if you just read that a couple times, it'll be up to the government to decide whether you're just lying or whether you're lying, but you don't have any cause to lie.
So therefore you get prosecuted.
It's insane.
Zero Hedge had an article, The War on Truth, and her talk about what we're talking about.
But there was one sentence there I wanted to read because you've heard me say it a few times.
And they say, today, too many of us have lost our way, and some know, some people no longer even believe in the concept of noble truth.
You talk about nihilism.
And you don't see it written very often.
Yeah, yeah, that's someone must have got an advanced copy of your book there.
It's interesting.
But, you know, the other point about this, and this is what we're kind of originally going to focus on, was the venue issue.
And if you put that next one on, and Turley, of course, captures the problem because the judge that Trump will get, Tanya Chutkin, she has made a name for herself for chewing out the January 6th cases, for throwing the book at these guys and gals for very minor things.
She is on the war path.
She will be the one to decide what will happen with Trump.
And he says Chutkin could effectively certify the deeper constitutional questions and let parties seek appellate review, or she could insist that Trump be tried before the constitutional questions are considered.
Although the DC circuit is not a friendly court to Trump, the Supreme Court would likely balk at the criminalization of false political speech.
You know, in that whole thing of the investigation that she was so much involved in, and she had a good record from some people's view, she sent every one of them to jail.
And that was a little bit over the top.
But, you know, the trial was such a farce.
And this whole thing of an insurrection and then an investigation.
And they had two Republicans assigned to this trial.
And Nancy Pelosi vetoed it.
And they could kick him out.
And they put two turncoats in instead to other Republicans that were really Democrats.
And so it wasn't a real trial.
And the most obscene thing they did about that, and now it's coming out that they were never given any information that the people who are being charged have to give the defense the information they had.
They couldn't even look at the films and all the films.
And they probably still haven't found all the answer there because there's so much.
So that is such a farce.
And if anything, that process is the insurrection.
The process, Russia Gate was where the insurrection was.
It was part of a silent coup that was going on there by being able to manage the scenario.
Silent Coup Allegations 00:05:39
Yeah.
Well, we're certainly not cheerleaders for Trump.
He did a lot of knucklehead things.
But it does increasingly seem the more we see about January 6th, it seems like January 6th, the purpose of it was to cover up for November 3rd, which is when the election took place, and something was happening.
And Trump may go to jail for saying that.
Who knows?
So I guess we move on to our next one now.
It's kind of a sad story because it started out as a great American story of immigrants moving here and becoming very successful.
And this is from our friends at Zero Hedge.
If we can put the next one on.
There we go.
Thanks.
So Anheuser-Busch Air says ancestors were rolled over in their graves over the disastrous pro-trans TikTok ad.
Billy Bush is a direct heir of the founders of Anheuser-Busch.
His father was Anheuser and his mother was Bush, or the other way around, I forget.
Anyway, he went on TMZ Live with Harvey Levin, talked about what happened, and he was pretty upset.
Boy, there's no doubt about that.
And it's such a sad story.
I've noted at times some of the charitable organizations that did very, very good work.
The turnover, the shift of attitude to people, you know, sometimes drift away, you know, and like the Carnegie Foundation and other big foundations may have been much better than they were when the person that made the money was in charge, and then he shifts over and the whole attitude and somebody takes them over.
And this is an example of businesses, and that's occurring in the business.
How many businesses now went along with all this nonsense and participating with governments to cancel people and do all this nonsense?
And that I think is dangerous, but that's a reflection of a prevailing attitude and their loss of respect for some maybe basic principle of telling the truth, you know, and what is the Constitution all about.
So this is sad in a sense.
The sad part is it happened.
It happens before.
And some got around it and survived.
But this was the end.
Closing shop.
Closing shop.
That to me is so sad, beyond their control.
And you say, well, they were dumb business people.
Well, they eventually got influenced with some dumb business people and social conditions that happened.
And, you know, I can't, the big thing I can't resolve is, did they do the ad because they knew exactly what they were doing and they were looking to destroy the company?
They were looking for chaos.
Or they did do it out of total ignorance that they were so innocent and they believed in this wholesomeness of polygenderism and all this kind of junk.
And they believed in it.
So it probably, I don't know if we'll ever sort that out completely, because they ended up in controlling so much and still are too much in control.
But people are waking up and there is a shift away from it.
Yeah, well, as could be expected, Harvey Levin was raking poor old Billy Bush over the coals, comparing this, him not approving of this ad with the old days when blacks and Jews weren't allowed to go and drink or whatever they weren't allowed to do.
He said there's just not a comparison.
You know, it's just not the same thing.
And if we can put up, we skip one and go to the next clip.
I think, I mean, I don't know about you, Dr. Paul.
We didn't talk about this, but I was sort of touched by this.
And I think, so Levin's given him a hard time and this and that and the other.
But here's what Billy Bush says.
He says, you know, I think people who drink beer, I think they're common folk.
I think they're the blue-collar worker who goes and works hard every single day.
The last thing they want pushed down their throat or to be drinking is a beer can with a message on it, with that kind of message on it.
I just don't think that's what they're looking for.
They want their beer to be truly American, truly patriotic, as it always has been, truly America's beer, which Bud Light was and probably isn't any longer.
End quote.
And then he goes on, Bush was asked by Levin, why doesn't he believe the beer is American anymore?
And he said, and this is Bush's response, the typical customer is not into transgenders.
People who drink beer care about wholesome things.
And this is the thing that got me.
And certain things should be kept private.
That sounds so quaint now, doesn't it?
It just should be private.
You know, I simplified that when I've been, you know, certain company people will bring this up and all of a sudden, I really don't care how people do sex.
Yeah.
Not my business.
Stay out of it.
They don't know you.
But, you know, the atmosphere of privacy contributes.
We don't think there's any, you have any rights to privacy.
So maybe that's part of that whole system of government is to know everything, or at least they assume they're supposed to know everything.
But no, life should be private, you know, and open.
But that to me is very sad.
Well, I'm so old-fashioned, I don't even approve of the skimpy bikinis to try to sell beer.
I think that's.
How about football?
Well, that attitude changed a little bit, you know, after they started demonstrating on this polygender stuff.
Well, I was going to go ahead and close out, if you don't mind, Dr. Paul.
And I'm going to close out by announcing a new speaker who will be with us on September 2nd.
You will not want to miss this speaker.
Michael's Assassination Revealed 00:05:02
And if he's not a household name, he should be, but it's an old friend of ours, Michael Vlajos.
He's with the Institute for Peace and Diplomacy, but he has a long career.
If you go to the next clip, he taught war and strategy at Johns Hopkins University and the Naval War College.
He worked at the Center for Naval Analysis, and he was the head of the Center for the Study of Foreign Affairs at the U.S. State Department.
He was the director of security studies program at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.
He was a senior staff member at the National Security Assessment Team on the National Security Analysis Department at Johns Hopkins.
He's the author of several books, and he is the author, by the way, if you go to the next one, of this article.
And I've known Michael for a while.
I had lunch with him back in January.
But this article, everyone is talking about it from Compact Magazine, The Ukrainian Army is Breaking.
Now, he's a military expert.
He's taught at the war colleges.
But this is an exceptional article that breaks down Beyond the hype of the mainstream media, what's going on with the Ukraine war.
And that's why I called Michael up and asked him if he would come visit with us on January 2nd.
And he graciously agreed to do so.
So Michael Vlajos will be there.
He's going to give a great talk.
He's a great lecturer.
You will not want to miss it.
And what am I talking about?
Go to the next one, Which Way America?
September 2nd, 2023, in the Washington-Dulles area, Ron Paul Institute 7th Washington Conference.
There's still plenty of time to get those tickets, get the plane tickets, get the car ready, come out and see us on September 2nd.
We look forward to seeing you.
Michael Vlajos, Doug McGregor, Ron Paul, Jeff Deist, it's going to be a great, great group.
Max Blumenthal, Anya Parimpil, great, great lineup of speakers from across the spectrum.
You're just going to want to hear from them all.
So we've got to see you there.
I think I'll be there.
I hope so.
You know, this whole issue of telling the truth seems to have been around for a long, long time.
And if you look at the early codes, the laws that existed, whether it's the Ten Commandments, Hammurabi, or Sumerian Code.
The one thing, a lot of that was miscellaneous.
You know, Sumeria had very complicated.
But, you know, all of those codes recognize the fact that you should tell the truth.
And sometimes the punishment was very bad.
Hurting people, hurting people, killing people and stealing.
Very, very tough on people like that.
And here it is, you know, a society barely existing.
Civilization was just starting.
And they seem to have a natural tendency to understand what truth was all about.
And when you disobeyed it, they felt that somebody should be punished.
He should be pointed out.
Well, it was rough stuff going back there, but there was an instinct that existed as far back as the Sumerian Code, if you look at it carefully.
But I think that's why we're starved today, because there's this almost purposeful destruction of this whole idea that there's a right and a wrong, and that you can do whatever you want, and it's arbitrary.
So I think that eventually, philosophically, has to be addressed.
But right now, the system that's going on now is systematically undermining the system that we have, and that we have to discredit them.
And that's why we have Russia Gate.
And who are the good guys?
Who are the fascists?
Who are the anti-fascists?
And I'll bet you 65% of the people in this country think the fascists are the people to hang around Donald Trump, something like that, even though it's coming from the noise of the people who claim.
And I think that's why Russia Gate is so important.
And the interpretation of what happened on January 6th is so critical to sort it out.
They got away with big lies there.
But, you know, eventually the lies are discovered and history will sort it out.
But that takes a while.
And certainly the example of, you know, right after Jack Kennedy was assassinated, well, you know, one guy comes up and Harvey Oswald did the assassination over and done.
But subsequently, the truth came out.
And there's probably, I think it's up to 80% now that people don't believe the government told us the truth about the assassination.
And every president since that, even though under law they were told to release all the information about the investigation of the assassination, they don't believe they've heard the truth and it's still withheld.
The Republicans haven't done any better than the Democrats in revealing what they know about what went on.
And I don't think hiding the truth is the way we should go if we're seeking truth.
Export Selection