After shipping some $45 billion in military equipment to Ukraine, the Biden Administration is bringing Ukrainian President Zelensky back to Washington to beg for more money. But with the war going badly for Ukraine and strong US opposition to spending more on the effort, it looks to be an uphill battle. Also today: who was the armed guy impersonating a cop at the RFK rally...and why can't RFK get Secret Service Protection? Finally...Homeland Security has a new target: you!
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today, Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you again.
Happy Monday, Dr. Paul.
How are you?
Good.
You all set to go?
We are ready.
Fresh and wholesome.
Yes, we'll take care of that.
Well, we still have a problem to deal with.
We'll start with one problem at a time, which caught our attention this morning, although it was announced over the weekend, and we knew it would happen.
And that is Zelensky wants more money.
Yeah, what a shock.
But it's good news.
Good news.
There's a bunch of American people who are not so willing to do such a thing.
They're arguing about it.
Even the Republicans are arguing among themselves.
You have people like Mitch McConnell.
He's on one side of the issue, and then another senator for Kentucky is on the other side of the issue.
And that's the way it is.
The Congress is sort of split.
But the American people, I think if you had some honest assessment of the American people, I think he'd say, enough is enough, you know, $100 billion.
Soon we're going to run out of money.
We'll have to print money pretty soon if we keep spending money like this.
But Zelensky, his town, he has a bigger hat than he had before.
His hat is there.
He wants it filled up.
He hasn't had enough money.
And it's not just the United States.
It's not their puny little war over there in Ukraine.
It has to do with World War III, and it has to do with every country in the world has to know what's going on.
And Zelensky, the headline here from the Hills, says, U.S. support to Ukraine is bigger than war.
If Ukraine falls, Putin will surely go further.
And he's warning us he's going to take over.
But, you know, there's a little bit of irony or deceitfulness that he's threatening us that Putin has instincts to become like Hitler, you know, a radical fascist.
But there's been some mention of the Ukraine people and the politicians that they lean toward, they're authoritarians.
There's two varieties of authoritarianism.
But I think the Ukrainians tended to link, you know, link more to the Hitler type of fascism.
But anyway, they're authoritarians.
I put them all in one category.
They use force, and they're vicious people.
And right now, they need more money.
And last week we talked a little bit about the subject.
Why is there such a PR effort to get the American people charged up?
We have to do it.
A war is coming.
But now they're using Zelensky to stir up the American people.
And we're hoping that that doesn't work.
And he isn't willing to admit some truths from the past few years.
Who started this war?
Oh, Zelensky.
And others would say, well, the Russians did.
The Russians did.
They invaded the country.
And they do not talk about 2014 at all.
How NATO and other Western countries rejected their promises of, look, we want peace in the world.
The lines are here.
We're not going to go close to the Russian border.
And they got pretty close to the Russian border.
And that's where we are today.
But as it has been predicted by some good military people, that's from the beginning.
This war is going nowhere because Something will happen to NATO and the money, and the Russians are not going to sit tight because they will see it, and they come closer to defending their country than, of course, the Ukrainians.
Yeah, it's what a difference it is.
You know, so Zelensky is coming to New York tomorrow and Tuesday, and he's going to the General Assembly meeting, and apparently his mission there is to try to start winning over some of the countries of the so-called global south who have veered toward the Russia, China, Iran Axis, Latin America, and Africa.
Now, he's going to be on a mission to try to win them over, to which I would say good luck, because I don't think he'll be very successful for a number of reasons.
And then he will come to the U.S.
He will apparently meet with President Biden.
But from what the Financial Times reported this morning, he's not going to speak in front of Congress like he did last time, last December, when he predicted a victory.
Remember, he gave the flag to Nancy Pelosi.
This battle of Bakhmut will change the course of the war, which it did, but not in the way that he thinks, because they lost that battle.
So it's a very different world, Dr. Paul, when he's in town now.
Their much-vaunted counteroffensive has not gone anywhere.
And everyone is admitting it.
Even Millie, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said that they're not going to get their land back.
So it's basically obvious that the counteroffensive is not going anywhere.
And as you point out, Congress is now facing, what, end of the fiscal year?
They're talking about shutting down government.
It's not a good time to come with your hat in your hand demanding money.
Yet they need that.
He's convinced he needs that 24 billion additional U.S. dollars.
He already's gone through 43 billion American dollars that have all gone literally up in smoke with hundreds of thousands of lives.
He wants another $24 billion.
Well, if the first $43 billion has shown no results, I think there are going to be a lot of people who are going to say, why would you put good money after bad?
You know, the theme of his visit to the West now, if Ukraine fails, Putin will take over.
It'll be world war.
So that is his threat.
There has to be intimidation, build up the fear-mongering, and try to rally the American people.
Now, the big question, are they going to do it again?
They're trying it on COVID, another lockdown.
They're testing the waters on that.
Hopefully the American people are waking up, and it seems like a few have awakened, even on the lockdowns and COVID.
But I think they should be talking about if the American people, the American taxpayer, lose out on this, what's going to happen?
And they don't talk about that.
But it is the American taxpayer because that's what the people feel.
Nobody in this country was getting together.
I always make fun of the saying, oh, a bunch of young people get together in two countries and let's have a war.
No, it wasn't quite like that.
But what they're doing is they're saying the American people, though, have awakened because it's their money.
It means that, oh, there's debt.
Isn't debt bad?
Some of them don't worry about the debt because they say we'll print the money, but that's the demonstration of the bankruptcy.
So this is what they're doing.
But the American people are aware of that, every housewife.
But I think part of our job is to emphasize the connection between this type of a foreign policy and how they're suffering at home.
They like to separate it.
The hawks, especially a Republican hawk, always has to do this, is, you know, justify it and go along with the scaremongering and avoid some pretty fundamental conservative economic viewpoints and they ignore the deficit.
It's been going on for a long time, and let's just hope more and more people will wake up.
Well, this war, now this is taking on a political component.
There's no question about it.
We're getting into campaign season.
We're getting into election season.
You've got a president who, let's just say, is not impressing a lot of people these days with a foreign policy that shows no signs of any victory.
He's now, I would say, wrongly blamed for the Afghanistan debacle.
He shares some blame because he supported the war, but he still has that on his back.
Now he's taking heat over the Iran thing, which we talked about last week.
So there's no foreign policy successes.
We're getting into an election season, and they're backed against the wall.
Put up that first clip if you can, because this is from the New York Times.
This is a surprisingly balanced article.
I think even the mainstream media is starting to understand that what we were saying all along actually is the truth.
The New York Times says, in the U.S., Zelensky will make the case for more aid and offer thanks.
The Ukrainian leader's second trip to America comes at a more delicate diplomatic moment as he tries to navigate political currents while expressing gratitude.
Now, especially in the gratitude, I think probably is his PR people telling him, stop being so arrogant.
You've got to say thanks once in a while.
But what's happening in Ukraine right now is not helping Biden, as I mentioned.
But also, and you suggested it early in your monologue when we opened, that Republicans are getting bolder now in their criticism.
They're losing that fear of being viewed as weak or pro-Putin or what have you.
They're getting bolder in their criticism because they know we're moving into an electoral season.
Partly that is the case, let's be honest.
But you're also seeing, I think, an administration that's increasingly torn because there's one faction that's looking to escalate.
And they're the ones that want to send attackums.
They want to send more weapons.
And then there's another faction, I think, that's looking for the exit.
And in fact, the escalation group, I would put Blinken in that group.
And here's a little clip, Dr. Paul, if we can just listen.
This was, I think, Friday or Saturday when Secretary of State Blinken, you might want to put your earpiece in.
He was asked on this week, well, if we send those missiles, if we send attackums, because as you know, Dr. Paul, they could probably reach Moscow.
And these are some serious missiles.
If we send them, are you going to give a green light for them to attack deep inside Russia?
Listen to Blinken's response.
It is 200 miles.
Interesting and chilling.
Are you okay if those missiles allow Ukraine to attack deep into Russian territory?
In terms of their targeting decisions, it's their decision, not ours.
Missiles 200 miles in range.
Are you okay if those?
But the point about this, Dr. Paul, is that the targeting is done by the U.S.
The missiles are manufactured by the U.S.
The global hawks that are up there flying around are U.S.
And it's U.S. or NATO personnel that are operating these systems.
And Russia has said, now this, you are at war with us, yet we have people like Blinken that says, hey, do whatever you want.
You know, I personally was offended, not that that was all that important, about what happened last December, because Zelensky came and he gets his ceremonial welcoming on the House floor.
That to me is a real insult.
I never thought, even though it's been used that way for a long time, it's just nothing more than a bully pulpit for the masses, for special guests, people like Zelensky coming.
He's probably going to get another speech on the House floor again.
But he's going to see it go to go to the White House again.
But I think that is such an insult that they can have speakers do this.
And what are they doing?
And they carry a lot of weight.
For some reason, they send messages.
They did that with Afghanistan.
They had Karzai down there.
Oh, yeah.
Speeches.
And so I had my own way of handling all that.
I couldn't stand being in the same room listening to that because it's a sort of a type of propaganda that is really stealing perception.
It's not like people donate money and they put an ad on the radio or something.
This is the use of taxpayers' money to propagandize, to promote the war and make it look official.
And when it comes from the floor of the House and Nancy Pelosi introduces these kind of people, well, this is serious stuff.
But I think it's serious.
And like we say, I think more and more people are beginning to realize maybe the cost of their groceries has something to do with our foreign policy and the endless spending and no rest without restraint.
Yeah, you probably felt like it was an insult to your intelligence, too, having to sit there being lectured by some foreign leader.
Well, I'll tell you what I did, Dr. Paul, and I don't do this very often, but I do recommend it.
I wrote to my representative, who happens to be to have taken the seat that you vacated, unfortunately, a few years ago, Randy Weber, and I wrote him a polite and courteous note, which is what I would encourage.
Don't go off the rails.
Polite and courteous notes saying, Dear Representative Weber, we don't want to send this money to Ukraine.
Please let me know that you're not going to send it.
And I think if people in Republican districts, more people did that, they would get the message.
Don't discount.
I think you know very well don't discount doing that, I think.
No, that does mean something.
You know, most people are apathetic in many ways.
They have so many other things in life to deal with.
But then when their interests are stirred, you know, if you got 10 or 15 letters in one day on this, that would be, you know, noticeable.
But what if you got 200?
Yeah.
And no, that represents a sort of a prevailing attitude and gives you a pretty good idea of what's going on.
So if you get 100 or so in a day and it's spontaneous handwritten and say no money, you know, for Ukraine, you know the people are shifting.
I don't think we're there yet, but I think people are getting very leery about it.
I think they're getting more leery about big government.
I think the administration has something to do with it that is something that Trump hasn't been able to cancel out and gain enough credibility to say, well, we're on the wrong track and what we need to do is maybe get a guideline from what the founders thought we should be doing in foreign policy.
We weren't supposed to be an empire.
We were supposed to be a republic and we've already crossed the Rubicon.
Next Protection Concern00:13:18
Yeah.
Well, as you say, I mean, those 100 letters, let's be honest, as you know, members of Congress are not necessarily the most brave people.
There are a few exceptions.
Walter Jones, yourself, a few more, but they tend to not be super brave people and they tend to be risk averse.
So 100 letters coming in saying, please don't send money to Ukraine is going to embolden them a little bit.
They're going to feel like, hey, I can do this.
I can follow my constituents.
I wanted to do one thing before we moved on, and that's because you started with this, and it was important, I think.
And maybe it's just me, but Zelensky sounds a little bit more unhinged than he has in the past.
This is from The Hill.
If you can put this next article up, just two quotes from it.
Zelensky, as you said, Zelensky says support is bigger than the war.
If Ukraine falls, Putin will surely go further.
Here's a couple things he said.
The next one.
Look, if Ukraine falls, what will happen in 10 years?
Just think about it.
The Russians reach Poland.
What's next?
A third world war.
When asked if the billions of dollars more in aid will prevent this, he said, I don't have an answer, okay?
And then going to the next one, now he goes on and says, the whole world has to decide whether we want to stop Putin or whether we want to start the beginning of a world war.
We can't change Putin.
Russian society has lost the respect of the world.
They elected him and re-elected him and raised a second Hitler.
They did this.
We cannot go back in time, but we can stop it here.
He sounds a little bit unhinged when he says all of these things.
It makes you wonder.
But I'm going to finish out this segment, if you don't mind, Dr. Paul, with a bit of good news because we need one.
Turn on that next one.
Now, this is a tweet or a post that we saw over the weekend.
Anna Paulina Luna, she's a Republican from Florida, I believe.
She said she won't vote to fund the government unless funding to Ukraine ends.
Young Republican.
I think this is the new, I hope this is the new Republican look and perspective.
We've talked about people like Matt Gates and others who feel the same way.
So there's a reason to be hopeful.
Well, there's one sentence in this article we've been talking about from the Hill that gave me a little bit of encouragement because the interviewer was asking reasonable questions to Zelensky.
And the article goes, when Zelensky was asked if it will take billions of dollars more in aid to prevent this, Zelensky said, I don't have an answer.
Just give me money.
He's speaking the truth.
You don't have an answer.
They didn't have an answer to begin with.
We'll learn to close this up.
If you ask him, Republican or Democrat, what is the real reason, if you only had one reason why we're spending so much money and providing so many bombs, trying to aggravate the Russians to do something stupid and expand the war, what would be the one thing that we could do?
My answer is there's money behind these kind of deals.
Oh, yeah.
Plenty of it.
Plenty of it.
And it's not going to us.
Let's move on to the second story, which I find it very disturbing.
We communicated over the weekend about this, put up that next clip, and most people have heard this by now.
Armed man posing as federal agent, arrested at RFK Jr. event in LA after Secret Service protection denied.
And before we go into it, Dr. Paul, RFK was speaking less than two miles where his father was assassinated.
Oh, so this is shocking.
I don't know what your thoughts are.
This is shocking.
You know, I sort of, there was one thing that I sort of liked about Truman.
He didn't have an army of people protecting him.
I thought it was the neatest story when he was done his presidency.
He and his wife walked to the train station.
So that was a little bit different.
But I tell you what, this is terrible.
He asked for protection and they denied it to him.
I mean, they could do it.
Not every single person gets it.
But it has to be reasonable.
And I think that's just horrible.
But the other thing that struck me, and this is because I work with you, and you have to, and you're always influencing me now to look at all angles.
You're in trouble.
Opposing, armed man posing as a federal agent.
Well, you look at the January 6th event, when the world was going to take over the U.S. government by unarmed entertainers.
So here it is, posing as a federal agent.
Well, you get to, you know, there's so much opposing as different agents.
You know, you could think of a lot of different things.
Maybe it's absolutely perfectly reported, but maybe this federal agent was there.
Maybe it was going to be a false flag or something.
You know, boy, they're on there.
They are protecting JFK.
You know, look at that.
They saved his life.
Yeah, yeah.
Because I quite frankly wonder whether, you know, I think RFK, you know, has security, has to, and he can afford it.
But it's still there.
They're claiming this guy, but he was dressed as a federal agent.
With guns.
With guns, yeah.
So he's in line.
So, well, anyway, to me, it raises more questions, but more disgust, because I think, you know, when you consider us providing all the security assistance to the Ukrainians to try to start a war with Russia, but we can't use any security to protect a member of a political family that has gone through more tragedy than you can imagine.
It makes you wonder what was going on in this guy's mind.
Now, maybe he was just a psycho.
That's possible.
But someone like that, who, if he wasn't completely nuts, he's taking massive risks to go there with his two shooters.
What was he thinking and what were his intentions?
I hesitate to even wonder, but what were his intentions showing up with two loaded guns and extra clips?
You know, he had to have had something in mind.
Well, I don't know what his identification was, but maybe people actually thought he was a legal federal agent.
That's what he was trying to pretend, yeah.
That's what he was trying to pretend.
People aren't going to take them on in the public without a little checking it out.
Well, here's what RFK said after the event.
If we can put this next one up, here's his post on X, formerly Twitter.
He said, I'm very grateful that alert and fast-acting protectors from Gavin DeBecker and Associates spotted and detained an armed man who attempted to approach me at my Hispanic Heritage speech at the Wilshire Ebel Theater in Los Angeles tonight.
The man wearing two shoulder holsters with loaded pistols and spare ammunition magazines was carrying a U.S. Marshal badge on a lanyard and belt-clip federal ID.
He identified himself as a member of my security detail.
Armed GDBA, that's his team, team members moved quickly to isolate and detain the man until LAPD arrived to make the arrest.
I'm also grateful to LAPD for its rapid response.
He continues, I'm still entertaining a hope that President Biden will allow me secret service protection.
I'm the first presidential candidate in history to whom the White House has denied a request for protection.
So a couple of things.
First of all, Gavin DeBecker, he's probably, I wouldn't say better off, but he couldn't go with a better team.
I mean, these people are top, top notch.
That's a plus for the marketplace for policing activity and protection.
But still, they don't have the resources.
I didn't interrupt.
They're the resources of the Secret Service.
Yeah, you know, this idea, some people think the number one purpose and the whole purpose of government is to make us safe and secure in everything that we do.
Everything from exercise to eating to political and policing and all that.
And just look at it.
And they can't even stop.
We don't even know who's coming into the country.
You know, that would be a token effort of trying to make us safe.
But they don't do that.
They do exactly the opposite.
We have to worry about being safe from our own protectors.
Well, let's take a look.
Here's the guy they arrested, if we could put this next one up.
The armed man who tried to, no, I don't know if that this is true, this characterization, but the armed man who tried to assassinate RFK Jr. Night has been identified as 44-year-old Adrian Paul Ispuro.
He is currently being held in LA on a $35,000 bail for felony charge of carrying a concealed weapon.
I just, you can see him with his EMT EMS shirt on.
We don't know much about him.
I did a little digging, not heavy digging.
There's some conspiracy stuff, of course.
Maybe true, who knows?
But nevertheless, hopefully we'll hear a little bit more about him.
Hopefully, well, I won't say.
Let's look at the last one, Tulsi Galbert.
She chimed in and, right, as usual, is on the right path.
She says, the Biden administration's refusal of Robert Kennedy Jr.'s repeated requests for Secret Service protection is the height of irresponsibility and callousness, showing their complete lack of concern for anyone who doesn't align with their political views.
It's powerful.
Pretty powerful statement, yeah.
Very good.
Yeah.
Well, hopefully he gets that.
I mean, you know that he's making waves.
Yep, that's for sure.
And it's a real, real tragedy when you think about it that we have to go through this.
Because, you know, most of my lifetime, there were problems and wars were going on and depression and all this kind of stuff.
But never, never, never like this, you know, where you can't.
I think I must have heard at an early age that one of the worst things that happened is for the police to become crooked.
And now I think in the Department of Justice, the FBI and all, and again, everybody that's ever served in there because I know a lot of people, even some of the relatives that have served in these departments, it still is at a point where people don't feel confidence.
People say, well, if you suspect something, don't call the police.
Don't call the FBI.
Especially if it's involved with something political.
It's a shame.
So it's a mess.
Well, let's put up that next clip and we'll finish out with this, Dr. Paul.
We'll call this, you should have listened to Dr. Paul's segment.
The Department of Homeland Security awards $20 million to a program that flags Americans as potential extremists for their online speech.
They told us they were only going to go after terrorists.
They just changed the definition.
Yeah, there you go.
That is all.
But, you know, I always worry about this idea that they're going to protect us and take care of us.
And even the, I consider simplistic way of handling the border, you know, building a fence.
That just doesn't seem likely to happen.
But the whole thing is, my approach to that and come up with something is quit subsidizing it.
If you subsidize something, you're going to get more of it.
How could we have subsidized illegal people and not knowing who they were under this administration?
It was always mediocre.
But in years past, we accepted a lot of new immigrants.
But to now, to set this up as protection extremists, I think that this subject came up in one of the debates about building the fence.
And I just, my attitude was, you know, I just don't, as a libertarian, I just don't like fences because I don't think they work all that well.
But I do worry about fences that get diverted from maybe their original intent.
And that is, you know, the Berlin Wall and a few other things like that when people are fenced in.
And there was an article today about capital controls.
Capital controls is a big deal when they're trying to protect the currency and rig the prices and manipulate the economy.
That whole thing.
But leaving a country becomes more difficult under those circumstances.
First, they say you, well, there's already some capital controls because you're limited to a certain amount of money.
But if things get bad, the fences that we're building, not the physical fence as much as controls on traveling back and forth, I mean, when it really gets bad is when you can't freely leave.
And I think there's hints of that.
And it's true.
traditional.
Many countries have used that.
But today, I think, was one of the articles I rarely read in recent months where they're talking about, you know, this might lead to capital controls.
Capital Controls and Exits00:04:22
Great.
Something to look forward to.
Well, anyway, we'll watch.
The money went to the Targeted Violence and Terrorism Protection Grant Program.
It's only 20 million just to drop in the bucket.
But the main point is that the target is us.
You know, the target is Americans.
That is right.
I mean, look who's suffering from what's going on in Ukraine.
You know, it's still back to the American taxpayer.
Of course, we really, who were the people that we should have regulated during COVID?
We should have regulated the regulators who wouldn't allow people to have volunteer discussion about the actual problem that we were having with the immunity system.
Doctors weren't even allowed to have a public discussion or teach it.
Well, anyway, we've been over that.
That's a mess.
Well, I'm going to make a couple of closing announcements if you're okay, Dr. Paul, with that.
First of all, if you're on our mailing list, you would know already that all of the speeches from our conference are now up and available in a convenient playlist on YouTube.
They're up on Rumble as well, but Rumble doesn't yet have a playlist feature.
Hopefully they'll get it soon.
But if you want to have them all in order, go to the Ron Paul Liberty Report on YouTube and they're all there and you can watch them all.
And if you're not subscribed to the Ron Paul Institute for updates, you should get subscribed.
So you're the first one to know.
Just go to ronpaulinstitute.org and subscribe.
It's free and we don't spam your box, trust me.
The second is we're going to kick off our fundraiser tomorrow with a terrific premium, which is Ron Paul's new book, The Great Surreptitious Coup.
Maybe I'll quiz you a couple of quiz questions tomorrow about it and we'll kick off and get some interest.
But it'll be a great and wonderful gift just in time for Christmas.
You can help the Ron Paul Institute and have a terrific book.
We will kick that off tomorrow because Mondays are rough.
We'll do it tomorrow.
And I want to once again say thank you to all our viewers who tune in regularly, especially those that tune in to the live stream, because we're interested in hearing from you.
And as is one of the reasons we have conferences, yes, we'd like to spread our message and our interpretation and what we have discovered.
But we also have conferences and communications because we like to hear from you.
That's why live streaming is a way you can send in messages.
And I do like to read those because I want to know what people are thinking.
And that is one goal that we have and we'll continue to do that.
And I'm also one that wants to make material as available as possible to as many people as possible.
And we still have enough freedom to do that as much as we complain about the abuse of the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the whole mess that's going on and the abuse of the economic system.
We still have a lot more freedom than a lot of other people.
But we also look at the curve and look at the amount of freedom we have over decades.
And believe me, things have gone downhill.
We have less freedom, especially if there's a war going on.
There always seems to be a war going on.
And some of the times the real problems we face are a bit hidden because to me, one of the issues that's coming to light now are the economic problems.
But they're huge.
And it's unimaginary about how big this is when you have deficits up to $32 trillion and growing exponentially.
So this is very, very important.
That's why we work hard trying to get information.
out.
And you can't separate the two.
You can't talk about Ukraine.
Oh, my position on Ukraine is send more money.
Oh, my position on Ukraine is, oh, we should send less money.
No, it has to do with philosophy.
It has to do with a non-interventionist foreign policy, non-aggressive foreign policy, as well as an economic policy.
It should be voluntary.
Everything should be voluntary.
And we'd stay out of a lot of trouble if we could teach people that voluntarism in all that we do is a good road to peace and prosperity.
I want to thank everybody for tuning in today to the Liberty Report.