You and Senate
Republicans
recently blocked a package
to support Ukraine and Israel.
Among the reasons,
more support for a border package
to protect the southern border.
Senate Republican leader Mitch
McConnell, however,
talking about the aid
for Israel and Ukraine,
said that threats from Russia, China,
Iran, Hamas are all interconnected.
I want you to take a
listen to what he had to say.
The challenges
facing America and our allies today
were not on all our card menu of projects
we can address at our leisure.
America doesn't have a luxury
of facing these threats.
Individual.
Our ability to contend with complex,
simultaneous threats is exactly
what our adversaries are testing.
Now, you disagree with that
and you oppose aid to Ukraine.
Explain your position.
Well, first of all, Jake,
I think it's possible
to have separate debates.
In fact, congressional Republicans
tried to force in Israel alone
aid package
just a couple of weeks ago
that Democrats blocked in the Senate.
So we can't have separate debates.
I think we need to have separate debates.
But on the Ukraine
question in particular,
everybody knows everybody
with a brain in their head, Jake, knows
that this was always
going to end in negotiation.
The idea that Ukraine
was going
to throw Russia back to
the 1991 borders was preposterous.
Nobody actually believed it.
So what we're saying to the president
and really to the entire world is
you need to articulate
what the ambition is,
what is $61
billion going to accomplish that $100
billion hasn't.
Which remember, Jake.
Ukraine is functionally destroyed
as a country.
The average age of a soldier
in the Ukrainian army right now is 43.
That's tragic.
That's older than me. I'm 39.
If this thing goes on
a little bit longer,
the average age of a Ukrainian
soldier is going to be older than you
and then a year later,
could be Wolf BLITZER.
That is a tragedy.
What does it look like?
I don't like this age group.
I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Joe.
I'm 54 for those wondering.
We are getting to a place
where we're going to be functionally
on the hook to pay
for Ukrainian pensioners
to rebuild the entire country.
We need to bring the killing to a stop,
and that's what American leadership
should be doing.
Not writing more blank checks to the war.
So what do you make
of the argument, though, that if the U.S.
and NATO's
and the EU cede part of Ukraine
to Putin or even all of Ukraine to Putin,
that really all
we're doing
is putting out the welcome mat
for him to then
invade a country
that is in the NATO alliance
such as Poland.
So there are two reasons
I don't buy this.
First of all, Putin has showed
he's much weaker
than a lot of people feared.
The Ukrainians have fought bravely.
They've also stalled Putin
in a very small amount
of territorial gain relative
to the entire country.
The idea that he can march to Poland
or Berlin is preposterous.
And the other thing
that this really misses here is
we have to remember our NATO's
allies, with the exception
of a few Eastern Europeans,
are not carrying
their fair share of the burden.
Most of them
don't even spend
2% of their GDP on defense.
If Putin is a threat to Berlin,
that means the Germans should be changing
something about their defense policy.
It doesn't mean we can write
indefinite checks to Ukraine. Right.
But Russia has been proven
to be something of a paper tiger
because the U.S.
has been helping Ukraine. Right.
I mean, that's the reason.
Well, it's
also because, of course,
the Ukrainians have fought very bravely.
I think it's also because, look,
you cannot occupy an entire territory
the size of Ukraine
with the amount of troops
that Russia has.
The idea that you can go
even further and control
multiple European nations
is, I think, a scare tactic
to get people distracted
from the fact
that our Ukraine policy
just doesn't make a ton of sense.
Yeah, I listened to Secretary Blinken.
What are we trying to do, Jake?
What is the end goal here?
How long does this go
until the president can articulate
the answer to those questions.
I don't know why
we would write another blank check.
Well, I guess the argument might be
and I'm certainly not Secretary Blinken,
but the argument might be
that Russia invaded a sovereign nation
that is an ally.
And what Russia and this is a pretty,
pretty stark morality tale
that what Russia is doing is evil.
And Putin's goals are,
as he has stated them
time and time again
to rebuild the former USSR.
It is a stark morality tale, Jake,
but we can't make strategic decisions
based on stark morality tales.
We have to figure out
what is in America's best interest.
We have a food crisis
that's getting worse
because of the prolonged war
in Eastern Europe.
We have an energy crisis
that's threatening to swamp multiple
allied governments in Western Europe.
What's in America's
best interest is to accept
Ukraine is going to have to cede
some territory to the Russians,
and we need to bring this war to a close.
What I think about the great human
tragedy here,
hundreds of thousands
of Eastern Europeans
innocent, have been killed
in this conflict.
The thing that's in our interest
and in theirs is to stop the killing.
Let's turn to some domestic issues,
especially and your doorstep.
Ohio's new constitutional amendment
protecting abortion rights
went into effect Thursday.
You said after it passed, quote,
We have to recognize
how much voters mistrust us on
this issue. US meaning Republicans.
This week,
the Texas Supreme Court
is blocking a woman in Texas
from obtaining abortion,
even though her fetus has a rare
genetic condition
that is almost always fatal
And her doctors
want her to be able to get this
so that she's able
to have babies in the future
and for her health.
Isn't that situation
an example of why many voters
might not trust Republicans?
Well, I don't know the details
that story, Jake,
but I will say that we have to accept
that people do not want
blanket abortion bans.
They just don't.
I say this as a person
who wants to protect
as many unborn babies as possible.
We have to provide exceptions
for the life of the mother,
for rape and so forth.
That is just a basic necessity
When I say that people don't
really trust, says Jake,
what I'm getting at is, look,
I am luckily a person of means,
but I have been shocked by you.
Go to the hospital, you have a baby,
you get a $20,000 unexpected bill.
What does that look like
for a middle class family
that is trying to figure out
how to pay the mortgage?
We've made it way
too hard
to have children
and have families in this country
in that environment.
If people see Republicans
not as the party
that's trying to make it
easier to have babies,
but is just trying to take people's
rights away, then we're going to lose.
I want to protect as many unborn
babies as possible.
I also think we have to win the trust
back of the American people.
And one of the ways to do
that is to be the truly pro-family party.
I think we are.
We've got to carry that message forward
and actually enact
some public policy to that effect.
Is birth control part of that policy
empowering women to be able
to make those decisions
before they get pregnant?
Look, obviously,
people need to be able
to make those decisions.
I don't think I know any Republican,
at least not a Republican with a brain
that's trying to take
those rights away from people.
But I think it goes deeper than that.
I mean,
I could provide a list for you if.
You want it. Well, okay.
Not not anybody. I talk to you, Jake.
But look,
I think the more important question is
I talked to a lot of people,
a lot of young families
who want to have babies.
They can't afford mortgages
more because they're terrified
about health care expenses.
We've got to answer
those questions for people.
We've got to have a role to play
because look,
we have a real problem in this country.
Not enough
American families that want to have
children are able to do it.
That's how you destroy a nation.
Let's turn to Trump, because
there are a lot of conservatives
who have deep concerns
about President Trump
a second term and democracy
if he is reelected.
Take a listen
to what
former Congresswoman Liz
Cheney told me this week.
He already tried to seize power once.
So, you know,
it shouldn't be hard for anybody
to imagine that he will do it again
once the president decides
that he's above the law,
as Donald Trump has.
Everything unravels nearly immediately.
Do you really have no concerns
that Donald Trump
might try to abuse his power
if reelected?
No, Jake, I don't.
Look,
the guy was president for four years.
We had peace.
We had prosperity.
We had wages rising
faster than inflation.
Joe Biden has been president
for three years now.
The average Ohio family
pays 10,000 more to afford the same
standard of living.
The idea
that Trump is going
to be radically different
than what he was four years ago
is just preposterous.
He was an effective,
successful president.
I think he will
be an effective, successful
president again.
That's why I have endorsed him.
And I think this desire
to make the election
all about the past
is indicative of the fact
the Democrats don't have much to run on.
I think Republicans do.
Well, with respect to one,
talking about the past
more than anyone is Donald Trump.
And he's out there
talking about how the 2020 election
was stolen from him.
He's using all sorts of bogus
evidence, lies,
assertions that were disputed
and overruled by court
after court judge after judge,
election board after election board
judges and election boards
that were Republicans and judges
that were appointed by him.
I mean, he's really
the one focus for 2020.
So, look, you just showed me
a clip of Liz Cheney.
And I think that the person, a person
who is clearly obsessed
with 2020 and talks
almost nothing
other than January 6th of 2021.
I think if you look at
what the president is out there
campaigning on, he's
campaigning on re
delivering peace and prosperity
for the American people.
Now, if you want to talk
about the 2020 election,
we can have that conversation.
But I want to talk about
I think President Trump
wants to talk about the future.
That's what this election
is going to be decided on.
That's what I'm focused on.
Well, I think the concern is that
he wouldn't stock his administration
with the JD Vance's of the world.
He would start and stock them
with individuals
who would not be able to tell him no.
One voice that I've heard people
express concern about
is a guy named Kash Patel.
He was on the NSC.
He served briefly
as the chief of staff for the Pentagon.
Here's what he had to say on
Steve Bannon's podcast earlier this week.
We will
go out and find the conspirators,
not just in government, but in the media.
Yes, we're going to come
after the people in the media
who lied about American citizens,
who helped Joe Biden rig
presidential elections.
We're going to come after you.
So, look, I know Kash very well.
Let me let me think
talk about what I think
he was talking about,
although I didn't see
the full context of the clip, Jake.
We know, like.
A lot of Pennsylvania.
Press, we know.
We know in 2020
that there were
massive pieces of evidence
that were suppressed by collusion
between the national security state
in this country and various various.
You're talking.
About the Hunter Biden laptop.
Hunter Biden laptop story.
There was a reason.
It was the reason that,
no, it was suppressed on social media
like a million for like a.
Day or two on Twitter. Jake.
Millions of Americans,
there have been studies on this,
didn't see that story
that would have seen it
if there hadn't been that collusion
between these technology companies
and members of the media
who had security clearances.
These people were using
the trust acquired
over a lifetime of public service
and lying to you.
Americans agree with pass.
Protection in order.
I agree
that we need to look seriously
at how there was collusion
between members of the press
and big technology companies
and members of national security.
SEC. Jake.
That's not journalism.
It is not journalism
to take your security clearance,
lie to the American people,
and then persuade the big technology
companies to censor
anti Joe Biden stories.
That's not journalism.
That is cooperation
between the government and journalism.
It's the opposite.
Well,
Donald Trump was president
at the time that any censorship was going
on, so nobody in government
that I mean, any Biden people were not
that were asking that were not
in the government at the time.
But I will just say,
as somebody that tried to see the laptop.
Rudy Giuliani wouldn't
let us see the laptop.
He wouldn't let us.
So we weren't able to report on it
because he wanted
us just to go by his work.