0:56

Yeah baby, it's episode

0:58

245 of Ask the Inspector on

1:01

March 11th, 2025. Jeff Norman and

1:03

Scott Ritter with you for the

1:05

weekly edition of The Lightning Round.

1:08

Today, Scott will answer every question

1:10

in three minutes or less. Top

1:13

of the day to you, sir. How are you? I'm

1:15

doing great. Thanks yourself. Excellent.

1:18

Love the new article. Perfidious

1:20

Albion. Perfidious meaning a

1:22

betrayal of sorts. One that has

1:24

gone unpunished according to the dictionary.

1:27

I don't know if we literally

1:29

apply that to the

1:31

ultimate here though. But you wrote quite

1:33

persuasively about George Soros'

1:36

reputation as an evil

1:38

man being justified and

1:40

you likened my friend Zelensky

1:42

to Frankenstein in this article. Yes,

1:46

and McCrone and Kirste Armour

1:48

too, Dr. Frankenstein have created

1:50

this monster. In

1:53

the movie

1:55

or the book, Frankenstein

1:58

kills Dr. Frankenstein. And

2:01

maybe that's what's going to happen here. The

2:04

bottom line is we're dealing with

2:06

people who have betrayed humanity, betrayed

2:08

the cause of peace in pursuit

2:11

of war. Donald Trump,

2:13

whatever you think of him,

2:16

is working for peace, imperfectly.

2:19

I'm not saying that everything he

2:21

does is great, but

2:24

at least he's trying to stop a war.

2:27

All Soros has done is

2:29

bring to fruition a plan

2:31

that he had hatched back

2:33

in 1993 to bring relevance

2:35

to NATO in a post

2:37

-Cold War environment, to

2:40

have NATO elevated to

2:42

the only entity capable

2:44

of enforcing the will

2:46

of the West and

2:48

that enforcement mechanism by

2:50

enforcement, I mean war,

2:53

would be fed by

2:55

Eastern European manpower utilizing

2:57

NATO military equipment. It's

3:00

1993. That's exactly what's happening

3:02

right now in Ukraine. And

3:04

it's just an evil plot.

3:06

George Soros is truly a

3:08

criminal of, you know, unmatched

3:12

proportions. And

3:14

he's backed by, well,

3:16

he was backed by the United

3:18

States and Europe collectively, the Collective

3:20

West. It's been fighting Russia violently

3:22

since February 2022. One

3:25

could even take it backwards from there.

3:28

But now we have

3:30

a new leadership, revolutionary

3:32

leadership again. There's

3:34

no denying it. I know people got upset

3:36

with me when I first wrote this and

3:39

talked about it. I talked about a domestic

3:41

revolution and a revolution in foreign affairs. No

3:45

one can prove me wrong. And I think everybody's

3:47

coming around to that. It is revolutionary. They don't

3:49

have to like it. But you

3:51

know, it is what it

3:53

is. And in the case

3:56

of Ukraine, this revolution in

3:58

foreign affairs is moving towards

4:00

peace. And These

4:03

people who call themselves our friends are

4:05

betraying us betraying America stabbing us in

4:08

the back And that's why I wrote

4:10

this article to call them out So

4:12

Soros, I don't know his exact age,

4:14

but he looks like he's about 150

4:16

After he is no longer with us

4:18

or no longer able to function is

4:21

the picture going to change or we

4:23

have to worry about his son or

4:25

some other successor Well,

4:27

we have to worry about

4:29

his son. His son is

4:32

running the foundation now and

4:34

calling the shots and dispersing

4:36

the money. It's you know,

4:38

this is a genetic problem

4:41

and I would like to

4:43

believe at some point in

4:45

time global humanity would find

4:48

a way to make these

4:50

terrible deed doers stop doing

4:52

their deeds. All

4:55

right, with your permission, Scott, let us

4:57

commence with the audience Q &A portion

5:00

of the show. As I said earlier,

5:02

here on the lightning round, Scott answers

5:04

every question in three minutes or less.

5:07

And on Friday night at 8 p

5:09

.m. Eastern time, we do the loquacious

5:11

version. That's when Scott

5:14

speaks very extensively for 90

5:16

minutes. And

5:28

the first question is from John in Arizona.

5:31

How does the Trump administration

5:33

protect against a likely false

5:35

flag staged by perfidious Albion?

5:38

And congratulations Scott, you've injected that

5:41

back into the lexicon. And the

5:43

bureaucrats to push the USA toward

5:45

war with the Russian Federation. Good

5:50

intelligence and standard

5:53

declaratory deterrence policy.

5:56

If you attack us, we destroy you. It

5:58

doesn't matter who you are. If

6:01

you attack the United States of America, you shall

6:03

be destroyed. Plain and simple. False

6:06

flag attack, we will quickly work through the false

6:08

flag and find out who was behind it and

6:10

we will destroy you. This should

6:12

just be a statement made by the president United States.

6:14

It doesn't matter who you are, the king of England

6:16

will kill you. The president of France,

6:18

you will die. If you attack

6:20

America, you will pay the ultimate price. There,

6:23

I just solved the problem. I don't know if we're

6:26

going to do that. But that's how I'd handle it.

6:29

Perfidious Albion. All

6:31

right. I'm going to help get that into

6:33

the lexicon even more. These

6:36

questions, by the way, were submitted in

6:38

advance. But while we're talking live, Yelena

6:41

the Magnificent is curating the questions on

6:43

the various live chats. And she'll be

6:45

with us later in the show to

6:47

speak with Scott about those questions. Next

6:50

question is from Dale in Toronto.

6:52

Why don't I just stop the clock there? It's

6:55

obvious the US wants to pivot

6:57

to the Pacific and to deal

6:59

with China. It's also obvious that

7:01

the American carriers outside of projecting

7:03

power in third world ports are

7:05

sitting ducks to hypersonic missiles. Outside

7:08

of Japan and South Korea, Guam

7:11

is your closest airbase. As containment

7:13

seems to have gone the way

7:15

of the dodo bird, what's left

7:17

for the American administration to do

7:19

concerning China? Well,

7:22

Dale, the question presupposes that the

7:24

pivot is a military pivot. I

7:28

would respond by saying that

7:30

President Trump ran on a

7:32

campaign of pursuing peaceful outcomes,

7:34

not promoting war. So

7:37

I would say that the pivot, rather

7:39

than being a military -bounded pivot, is

7:41

a pivot towards peace, a pivot

7:44

towards stability, a pivot

7:46

towards redefining the Chinese

7:49

-American relationship. unequivocal

7:53

terms. And I

7:55

think the proof that I'm right

7:57

is that rather than deploying more

7:59

aircraft carriers to the region, President

8:02

Trump appears to be preparing

8:04

to deploy himself to Beijing

8:06

next month to engage in

8:09

face -to -face talks with

8:11

Xi Jinping in his first

8:13

state visit. Sounds

8:16

like peace to me. Sounds like diplomacy. certainly

8:19

doesn't sound like a man looking for a fight. So

8:22

I think we have to

8:24

redefine what this pivot means.

8:26

It's not a pivot to

8:28

fight, it's a pivot to

8:31

embrace, a pivot to work

8:33

collegially towards mutually beneficial outcomes.

8:37

All right, we haven't heard from our

8:39

friend Uncle Sweet Potato in quite a

8:41

while, and it's always good to hear

8:43

from him. Uncle Sweet Potato

8:45

in Hong Kong. In response to

8:47

the coming tariff on Chinese products,

8:49

the Chinese Embassy in the US

8:51

announced, if war is what

8:53

the US wants, be it a tariff

8:56

war or trade war or any type

8:58

of war, we are ready to fight

9:00

till the end. What do you make

9:02

of that, Inspector? I

9:05

think China is taking a page out of

9:07

Trump's book. You know, Trump is fully capable

9:09

of hot air and bluster, puffing

9:11

his chest out and running around like

9:14

a madman. as

9:16

a preface for more balanced

9:18

normal behavior. We

9:21

saw that, you know, I

9:24

guess most poignantly portrayed in his

9:26

attitude towards North Korea where he

9:28

went before the United Nations and

9:30

spoke of fire and fury and,

9:32

you know, Little Rocket Man and

9:34

all that kind of stuff and

9:36

then turned around and met with

9:39

Kim Jong -un three times to

9:41

try and bring about peace. It

9:43

was failed because he surrounded himself with

9:46

the Deep State, like

9:48

Pompeo and John Bolton. This

9:50

time, the Deep State's not anywhere

9:53

near him. There's still

9:55

an element of this

9:57

bluster taking place and

9:59

such, but as I

10:01

said, I don't imagine

10:03

that you prepare for

10:05

war by, you know,

10:08

carrying out a state visit

10:10

with Xi Jinping. Leaders

10:13

don't meet to stare each other down

10:15

and spit in each other's eyes. They

10:17

meet to shake hands, smile, and sign

10:19

agreements. And I think that's what we're going

10:21

to see in April, a meeting

10:23

between two of the world's greatest

10:25

leaders sitting down talking about helping.

10:32

All right, let's just pause

10:35

a couple of seconds. That

10:37

audio thing is happening again,

10:39

which I think is Stream

10:43

Art Issue or Internet Issue? Okay, hopefully

10:45

it's better now. I think the volume

10:47

wants me to get enraged and have

10:50

a rant, but I'm rant proof today,

10:52

so it is. All

10:54

right. The dogs aren't though.

10:57

The audio is okay now.

10:59

Lydia in South Carolina, do

11:02

you know any reliable source for

11:04

up -to -date information about what

11:06

is happening on the battlefield in

11:08

Ukraine and not just propaganda? Well,

11:13

a way, everything's proper, again, so you have to

11:15

be careful. There's

11:17

very few totally unbiased sources

11:19

of information out there. Even

11:22

the good sources, for instance,

11:25

the one I'll recommend is Marat Karillin.

11:27

He has an outstanding sub -stack. You

11:30

should subscribe. And

11:33

he provides daily updates

11:36

on the battlefield, very

11:38

detailed maps and accurate

11:40

information. But

11:43

just so you know, he is

11:45

a Russian patriot and a Russian

11:48

soldier and a Russian journalist. So

11:50

there is an element of pro

11:52

-Russian bias in his reporting, but

11:55

it's very accurate. And

11:57

that's where I would go if I

11:59

wanted to get the baseline. After

12:02

that, Once you establish that

12:04

baseline, then what you can do is

12:06

there's several telegram channels. You can go

12:09

through both Ukrainian and Russian alike and,

12:11

um, you know,

12:13

glean information there, bounce it off

12:15

of the baseline established by Marat

12:18

Karelin, and you'll get a more

12:20

nuanced picture. And, uh, that's,

12:23

that's the best you can hope for in

12:25

a conflict like this. You're pointing at yourself

12:27

as you say there are other good telegram

12:29

channels. Then there's black was

12:31

a black mountain Give yourself you can

12:33

put you can put a banner but

12:36

also It might be good to either

12:38

restate his name or get his address

12:40

there so people can actually find Marat

12:42

Well, I think I think I've interviewed

12:44

him several times. He's a good man

12:46

I think Yelena could probably hunt down

12:48

his is his substacked and his contact

12:50

information He just has a book coming

12:53

out too. So, um Yes. See if

12:55

you can find that, Yelena, and then

12:57

you can also shamelessly promote yourself to.

12:59

Why the hell not? That's right. You're

13:01

in with the end crowd, Yelena. Jason

13:04

in Australia, when the fighting in

13:07

Ukraine ends, there will be war

13:09

memorials built across the new Russian

13:11

territories to commemorate those Russians who

13:13

died. They will be

13:16

remembered. Will Russia be able

13:18

to allow Ukrainians to mourn and

13:20

remember their one million dead and

13:22

what remains of Ukraine? There's

13:26

a political question that

13:28

only Russians can answer.

13:30

I would imagine that

13:32

the Russians would allow

13:34

appropriate memorials to be

13:36

raised to remember the

13:39

fallen in a way

13:41

that doesn't glorify the

13:43

cause, especially if

13:45

the fallen are, you

13:47

know, Azov and, you

13:49

know, the

13:51

bandarists. Russia

13:55

has never been about

13:57

disgracing the fallen or

13:59

disgracing their enemies. But

14:03

this is a political question,

14:05

and I think only Russia

14:07

can answer it. And I

14:09

would imagine that if it's

14:11

done properly, respectfully, in

14:14

a manner that it's not seen to

14:16

be promoting the ideology that got Ukraine

14:18

in this sad state of affairs to

14:21

begin with, Russia

14:23

should have no problem with it. But again, that's

14:25

only a question that Russia can truly answer. All

14:29

right. For the first time

14:31

since the clocks sprang ahead

14:33

one hour, we present our

14:35

friends in South Carolina. John,

14:38

how are you, John? Very

14:41

good, Jeff. And greetings to

14:43

Scott and to your international

14:46

audience. Scott, I

14:48

have a question for you today, which

14:50

is a little bit off the subject.

14:53

As you may know today

14:55

former Philippine Philippines president Duarte

14:57

was possibly taken onto a

15:00

plane bound for the ICC

15:02

and the Hague Netherlands Who

15:04

do you believe Scott snatched

15:06

the Philippine president? Thank you

15:08

very much. I'll Listen for

15:11

your reply Thank You John

15:13

all the best sir. I

15:15

don't think it was I

15:17

think he was arrested by

15:20

Filipino authorities who You

15:23

know felt that the warrant

15:26

for his arrest was a

15:28

legitimate warrant That the crimes

15:30

he committed were real and

15:32

that because of who he

15:34

is Filipino court system was

15:37

incapable of administering impartial justice

15:39

Those are the terms that

15:41

normally apply when somebody's taken

15:43

to To the Hague the

15:45

Hague is not a replacement

15:48

for national court systems. The

15:50

Hague is there when the

15:52

national court systems aren't able

15:54

or willing to prosecute. And

15:57

I think in the case

15:59

of a former president who

16:01

has allegedly is responsible for

16:03

30 ,000 deaths, murders,

16:07

extrajudicial killings, that the Filipinos believe

16:09

that he could not find justice

16:11

in the Philippines. And therefore, they're

16:14

the ones who arrested him and

16:16

put him on an airplane to

16:18

All right, Scott, you look spectacular

16:20

in the new daylight savings time,

16:23

sunlight shining on your face. But

16:25

let me ask you, apart from

16:27

that, where do you stand on

16:30

the controversy? Are you

16:32

in favor of changing the time

16:34

twice a year? Do you want

16:36

a permanent year -round daylight savings

16:39

time or permanent year -round standard

16:41

time? Why

16:45

I just don't understand the the reason

16:47

behind it. I mean if there's a

16:49

Someone can sit there and say by

16:52

doing this we save 1 .2 trillion

16:54

dollars a year because of you know

16:56

Efficiency and some all this kind of

16:58

stuff. I go alright. It's you know,

17:00

but I Don't understand why it is

17:03

we do this. I mean the extra

17:05

hour What is it

17:07

cosmetic? So exactly

17:10

what it is. It's just a preference

17:12

for getting more daylight time versus more

17:14

darkness time, depending on whether you're an

17:16

early riser or not, I think is

17:18

what it comes down to. I'm in

17:20

favor of keeping the clocks the same

17:23

year round. I

17:25

just find it to be

17:27

unnecessary and such. But you

17:29

know, look, as long as

17:31

there's no financial

17:35

downside, I mean, or harm.

17:38

If there's no harm other than, you know,

17:40

getting Scott Ritter upset that he woke up

17:42

Sunday and didn't realize that it was daylight

17:45

savings and whatever I was planning to do

17:47

at a certain time is no longer able

17:49

to be done because I slept through it.

17:51

I mean, that's just my fault. If

17:54

there's no harm in the

17:56

majority of people want it,

17:59

whatever. I don't, it's not a big

18:01

deal. I

18:04

don't know, though. I mean, I

18:06

thought there was some sort of, you know,

18:09

efficiency model or something like that

18:11

related to work. I

18:13

thought it was just a matter of preference,

18:15

but maybe there is. I don't know enough

18:18

for it. I mean, because it was just

18:20

preference, then it just seems like a lot

18:22

of hullabaloo. Yeah. Well, I

18:24

vote for daylight savings time all year

18:26

round, because I am not an early

18:29

riser, so I don't. but eventually daylight

18:31

savings time is no longer because we

18:33

go through long days and short days

18:35

and eventually you know you're going to

18:38

be in the dark one way or

18:40

the other. Well that's true but relatively

18:42

speaking it's still going to be more

18:45

daylight on the later end if it's

18:47

daylight savings time right? I

18:49

don't know. All right enough

18:51

of that let's not cut into

18:53

the valuable question time of our

18:55

audience I apologize. Now

18:57

I still can't figure out if this

18:59

is Ryan himself with a

19:02

thinly veiled pseudonym or if this is

19:04

somebody who's playing off his name or

19:06

if it's just a coincidence and is

19:08

really a guy named Ryan Hilton in

19:11

Texas. I forgot to ask Ryan. But

19:13

anyway, here's the question. Why did Ray

19:15

McGovern on George Galloway's show mention Trump's

19:18

life could still be in danger? He

19:20

is now the president and no one

19:22

can stop him. Am I missing something

19:24

here and how do you feel that?

19:28

How do you feel about it? I

19:31

don't know, was Abraham Lincoln? No one

19:33

could stop Abe, right? Kenley?

19:35

No one could stop him. No

19:37

one could stop him. Gosh,

19:40

Kennedy, he took a bullet. Roosevelt

19:42

was shot in the heart. He

19:45

just has a thick chest and he had a book

19:47

or something there to stop the bullet. Gerald

19:49

Ford was shot at. Ronald Reagan was shot and

19:51

hit. I

19:54

think the president is

19:56

very vulnerable. you

19:59

know, hopefully the Secret Service does

20:01

their job. But, you know, one

20:03

of the problems we have right

20:06

now is we have a Ukraine

20:08

that's going insane. Just so the

20:10

audience understands why I'm saying this.

20:13

An elite Ukrainian airborne unit has

20:15

gone on record saying that the

20:18

Ukrainian diaspora here in the United

20:20

States, which is a Banderas diaspora.

20:22

And I will refer you to

20:24

the rules of the bandarist organization,

20:27

all of which sound very patriotic

20:29

until you get to, I think,

20:31

like paragraph eight, where it says,

20:34

absolute adherence to the rules and

20:36

orders of the organization. Absolute.

20:40

And this is the bandarist organization. So it means at

20:42

the end of the day, they're literally a team of

20:44

assassins waiting to receive orders to kill people. Because

20:47

that's what bandarism is all about. It's about

20:50

death, destruction, violently opposing anybody who stands up

20:52

against them. Right now, we have Ukraine calling

20:54

the United States the enemy. We have a

20:56

legislator in the Ukrainian Rada saying the United

20:58

States is the enemy of Ukraine. I'd like

21:00

to show them what it means to be

21:03

an enemy of America. Now,

21:05

I'm a man of peace, but I'm

21:08

not a pacifist. And if you want

21:10

to be my enemy, Bring

21:12

it on. Make my day. I

21:15

mean, let me play and let

21:17

America play. I would

21:19

advise the Ukrainians to take a look at

21:21

Kiev as it is today and understand that's

21:23

how your city looks when you've been at

21:25

war with Russia for three years, which means

21:27

you haven't been at war. Look

21:30

at Mosul. Look what we did

21:32

to Mosul when we took on ISIS. Look at

21:34

Raqqa. Look at any one of

21:36

these Syrian towns and villages that housed ISIS and

21:38

what we did to them. We

21:40

will bomb you into oblivion. We will annihilate

21:42

you. We will slaughter your people. That's what

21:44

we do for a living. We do it

21:46

better than anybody else in the world. Do

21:49

you really want to be our enemy? And

21:51

I'll tell you what, one way to get your nation

21:54

knocked off the face of the earth is to attack

21:56

America. Stab us in the back. We're trying

21:58

to bring peace to your country. Now

22:00

you have your elite airborne

22:02

unit saying the diaspora is

22:04

to attack Americans. to commit

22:06

political violence. I'm still on

22:09

three death lists. We

22:11

just had a reporter shot in

22:13

Austin, Texas. He's on the

22:15

death list. We don't know if his murder is related

22:18

to the death list or not. But

22:20

if you're on a death list and

22:22

you've reported things that the Ukrainians find

22:24

unhappy, they receive orders to start political

22:26

violence and now you die, maybe

22:29

it's time the FBI start

22:31

investigating the Ukrainian diaspora. That's

22:34

my recommendation. Maybe it's time we start

22:37

deporting the 240 ,000 Ukrainians that are

22:40

here in this country because we gave

22:42

them safe haven in 2022. It's

22:44

time to send them home because they're

22:47

no longer our friends. They've identified as

22:49

the political opponents of the sitting president

22:51

of the United States of America. They're

22:53

opposed to the policies of the United

22:55

States of America and they are part

22:57

of an organization that takes orders from

22:59

the bandarists in Ukraine and they've been

23:02

ordered to commit political violence. Screw

23:07

Ukraine and screw the Ukrainians. I'm at

23:09

the point right now where I'm sick

23:11

and tired of them. I'm sick and

23:13

tired of their cause and I'd like

23:15

to help Donald Trump promote peace But

23:17

if they want war, I mean has

23:19

that get a revolution You want to

23:22

fight? Let's let it begin here. Um

23:24

I've got no tolerance for them. I think

23:27

I went over to three minutes or you

23:29

didn't set the clock. I don't know which

23:31

one. No, I Replaced it with a new

23:34

The news sound, but I think the volume

23:36

was too low. I just turned it up

23:38

for the next time. This is it by

23:41

the way Can you hear that? I didn't

23:43

hear it I thought the bell might be

23:45

too hard. So I was looked I came

23:47

up with something. I was trying to soften

23:49

a little bit. Yoo -hoo. It's too soft

23:52

though, huh? All right, I see that you

23:54

know, they're 22 ,000 bandits in in in

23:56

Yucanda. I like that Yucanda Become the 51st

23:58

state we can help you take care of

24:00

that problem too All

24:03

right, the next question is from

24:05

H. Sheridan in Washington, DC. Once

24:07

upon a time, President Putin referred

24:09

to Odessa as the apple of

24:11

discord. In the current peace

24:13

negotiations, do you think Odessa may

24:16

be used as an item in

24:18

the discussions? If so, how? And

24:20

if not, why not? I'm

24:25

not at the table, but from what

24:27

I understand from various sources, the

24:30

Russians have made it

24:32

clear that their foundational

24:34

requirement for a ceasefire

24:36

is for Ukraine to

24:38

withdraw from every square

24:40

inch of constitutional Russia.

24:42

That means all of

24:44

Kyrgyzstan, all of Lugansk,

24:48

and all of Kyrsk. They can't

24:50

even talk about a ceasefire

24:52

until that has happened. That

24:56

implies that Russia is not making

24:58

territorial claims against Odessa

25:00

and Karkov, nor would I

25:02

expect Russia to. Vladimir Putin

25:04

has never said that he

25:07

is seeking to acquire those

25:09

territories as well. But

25:11

I think the Russians might leave the

25:13

question open. I

25:15

personally believe that Russia

25:18

is part of their

25:20

post -conflict restructuring of

25:22

Ukraine will be in

25:24

a position three

25:27

years from now, five years from now,

25:29

to hold referendum in both Odessa and

25:31

Kartakov, and maybe Mikhail Iov and Dima

25:33

Petrovsk, to

25:36

give the Russian population there an opportunity to decide,

25:38

do they want to remain in Ukraine, or do

25:40

they want to come over to Russia? And

25:42

I think that might be

25:45

how Russia acquires Odessa and

25:47

Kartakov in a post -conflict

25:49

settlement, political

25:52

settlement. The

25:54

other thing is to tell the Ukrainians that, you

25:57

know, we're here talking right now,

25:59

we've given you our objectives, but if

26:01

you want to continue the fight, understand

26:04

that we will keep going as far

26:06

as we need to go in order

26:08

to achieve the outcome we want. And

26:11

that's sort of an implied threat

26:13

that Odessa and Karkov would be

26:15

on the map. Odessa

26:18

is problematic for the Russians. They're

26:21

not shying away from a fight,

26:23

but I think if the Russians

26:25

made a military move towards Odessa

26:27

that it would probably create some

26:29

sort of European intervention. And then

26:31

we'd have a bigger fight on

26:33

our hands, not that Russia would

26:36

lose, but it's just a fight

26:38

we don't need to have. So

26:40

I think the Russians are probably

26:42

moving towards getting constitutional Russia under

26:44

the control, getting a ceasefire in

26:46

place that brings about political change

26:48

in Ukraine. demilitarization,

26:52

denazification, constitutional changes, and

26:54

then three years from now making

26:57

a play through referendum through the

26:59

United Nations right of self -determination

27:01

clause. Okay,

27:04

let's take a phone call. Hey

27:06

there, you're on with our favorite weapons inspector,

27:08

what's on your mind? Hey

27:12

Scott, hey Jeff, thanks for taking my call. Scott,

27:15

I just had a quick question

27:17

about a scenario I was kind

27:19

of worried about with the talk

27:21

of European troops being placed in

27:24

Ukraine. I was concerned

27:26

about, and there's several articles on

27:28

the Russian side and the European

27:30

side that have kind of corroborated

27:33

this, but the idea of European

27:35

forces being sent in as a

27:38

tripwire force to get killed and

27:40

then escalate the war to the

27:42

nuclear threshold via the fringe domestic.

27:45

nuclear deterrent. I mean, it's not

27:47

that crazy to me that these

27:49

people who are willing to sacrifice

27:52

millions of lives without blinking would

27:54

want to sacrifice France or Great

27:57

Britain for St. Petersburg or Moscow

27:59

or just the chance at it.

28:02

So how realistic do you think is

28:04

this scenario? And I think Russia has

28:06

said that the United States can't wait

28:08

it out behind the Atlantic. So

28:11

I'm trying to Wonder

28:14

what they're doing in Europe or is

28:16

this all just kind of shrieking madness.

28:18

Thank you Thanks for the call Well,

28:20

I Mean that let's just talk about

28:23

the first thing in order to have

28:25

a trip wire force be destroyed. You

28:27

have to deploy a trip wire force

28:29

What trip wire force is being deployed?

28:33

No one's you can put a name to

28:35

it How many troops where are they coming

28:37

from? How are they getting there? How will

28:40

they be sustained? So

28:42

right now I see a lot

28:44

of talk and a lot of

28:46

thrashing of arms and stuff, but

28:48

I see no real movement towards

28:50

assembling the force structure necessary to

28:53

deploy. So I'm not worried about

28:55

it. I think the United

28:57

States has made it clear that

28:59

there won't be Article 5 protection

29:01

attached to any force of that

29:03

nature. And if Europe wants to

29:06

hide behind a French nuclear force,

29:08

they just invite their own destruction.

29:11

Russia is fully capable of

29:13

launching a preemptive nuclear strike

29:16

that decapitates the French nuclear

29:18

deterrent. If

29:21

that's the game that France wants to

29:24

play, then Russia can play that game.

29:26

But I don't think we're going to

29:28

get there because I don't think that

29:30

neither the French nor the British have

29:32

the means to even begin this scenario.

29:34

They don't have the forces to deploy.

29:38

So I don't think we need to worry about it. Zack

29:42

in Green Bay, Wisconsin,

29:45

some are saying this Kursk

29:47

offensive by the Russians is

29:49

strategically comparable to the Germans

29:51

invading the Sudan region in

29:53

World War Two, meaning Ukraine

29:55

didn't expect it and is

29:57

about to be surrounded. Do

29:59

you see this Kursk offensive as a

30:02

game changer that will be the end

30:04

of the Ukraine army? Germany

30:11

invaded Sudan in World War II.

30:14

I'm not aware of that. And

30:18

if they did, the fact

30:20

that I'm not aware of

30:23

it means it really wasn't

30:25

an earth -shattering move. So

30:28

it didn't have any

30:31

strategic impact. I'm confused.

30:36

I think the Russians are

30:38

Defeating a a Ukrainian an

30:40

ill -advised Ukrainian incursion and

30:43

decurse that was supposed to

30:45

achieve several strategic objectives outcomes

30:47

that didn't achieve any of

30:49

them It was supposed to

30:52

they were supposed to hold

30:54

on to this territory and

30:56

be able to use it

30:58

as a negotiating chip at

31:01

the negotiating tables That's not

31:03

happening And they were supposed

31:05

to divert significant military forces

31:07

away from the offensive

31:10

in the Donbass and Zaporizhia. That

31:13

didn't happen. Russia has

31:15

sustained its offensive drives

31:18

in the east and

31:20

Russia has successfully mustered

31:22

sufficient forces to annihilate

31:24

the Kursk pocket. And

31:28

that's that. I

31:30

think when the history is written, we'll have a better

31:33

idea. Sudeten, there we

31:35

go. Sudan

31:37

maybe or something. Yeah, I'm

31:39

like Sudan. Sudan, S

31:41

-E -D -A -N. Could

31:44

be. I didn't have to

31:46

go back and re -examine the

31:48

question now because I moved past

31:50

it. But I was like Sudan.

31:52

I don't remember them going into

31:54

Sudan. Anyways,

31:58

I think this will go down as one

32:00

of the major strategic errors of Ukraine. It

32:03

wasn't going to... win

32:05

the war for Ukraine. But if they

32:07

had held out to the strategic reserve,

32:09

they'd be in a better negotiating position

32:12

today because they would still hold a

32:14

stronger hand in the East. But now

32:16

they're collapsing on all fronts and they're

32:18

in the desperation stage right now where

32:20

they're looking for a miracle. I don't

32:23

think that miracle is going to come.

32:26

Okay, in just a few minutes, Yelena

32:28

the Magnificent will be joining us with

32:31

a perfect 10 minutes of questions that

32:33

have come in on live chat. If

32:35

you would like to submit your questions

32:37

in advance for the next episode of

32:40

Ask the Inspector, you can do it

32:42

at scottridder .com. BM in Romania, what's

32:45

your opinion on the canceling of democracy

32:47

in Romania? Will the USA

32:49

act in any way against this? It's

32:54

the canceling of democracy. So it

32:56

just exposes the hypocrisy of Europe.

32:58

And one of the reasons why

33:00

the United States needs to disentangle

33:02

ourselves from this web. Europe

33:05

is no longer a place of freedom.

33:09

I was invited to travel to Germany. And

33:11

even if I get my passport back, I'm

33:13

not going to Germany anytime soon. Because how

33:15

can I step into a country the moment

33:17

I land foot could arrest me for the

33:19

things I've been saying. Germany's

33:21

not. A place where free speech

33:24

is welcome. Germany is not

33:26

a place that respects freedom, and Germany

33:28

doesn't respect democracy. Alternative

33:30

for Deutschland came in second, and

33:32

yet they are saying that the German people who

33:35

voted for that will not be allowed to be

33:37

represented in the government. Germany

33:39

is just the antithesis of

33:41

democracy. And that's

33:43

all of Europe. Europe no

33:46

longer stands for democracy. It

33:48

stands for authoritarian rule that's

33:50

becoming dangerously militaristic. Romania

33:53

had a presidential candidate who

33:55

was on track to win,

33:57

who was seeking to pull

33:59

Romania out of this mess

34:02

and under pressure from the

34:04

European Union. the

34:06

Romanian deep state intervened and uh

34:08

you know now we have this

34:11

this mess we don't know how

34:13

it's going to end up massive

34:15

demonstrations in the streets whether these

34:17

demonstrations will manifest at the downfall

34:20

of the government or um rile

34:22

up my understanding is that um

34:24

your guess goo's party um may

34:27

register another candidate and this candidate

34:29

uh is almost a shoe in

34:31

to win in this you know,

34:33

if he reflects the same values

34:36

and principles and policy platforms that

34:38

your desk go had, then Romania

34:40

is headed on the same trajectory

34:42

of getting out of the EU

34:45

and probably getting out of NATO.

34:48

What should the United States do? I

34:50

don't know. JD Vance mentioned this several

34:52

times. I

34:55

can't imagine that the vice

34:57

president of United States commits

34:59

to a policy position. And

35:01

then when Europe doubles down

35:03

on stupid, We

35:05

do nothing to follow through on the

35:07

principled stance that J .D. Vance took.

35:10

So I would imagine that you're going

35:12

to see some sort of diplomatic response

35:14

from the United States in support of

35:16

Romanian democracy, which means in

35:19

opposition to the efforts to suppress the

35:21

candidacy of George Escu. Okay,

35:24

now comes another phone call. If I know

35:26

this area could, I'm going to guess it's

35:28

Missouri. Are you calling from Missouri? Yes,

35:31

I'm calling from Missouri. Good afternoon. Hey

35:33

there. What's up? Yeah,

35:36

I only want to bring to

35:38

your attention a technical problem with

35:41

your broadcast When I go to

35:43

rumble and I for the last

35:45

week or so when I tune

35:47

in ask the inspector It doesn't

35:49

start until like three or four

35:51

minutes into the broadcast Rumble is

35:53

not showing it from the beginning.

35:55

I really like asking inspector and

35:58

I I don't know if you

36:00

can do anything about it, but

36:02

Well, I can contact Rumble and ask about

36:04

that. And then, meanwhile, if any of the

36:06

other Rumble viewers can post a comment to

36:09

let us know if you're having the same

36:11

experience or not, that would be helpful. Thanks

36:13

for the call. Yeah. Is that

36:15

it? Yeah, sure thing. Bye -bye. Yeah, that's it.

36:17

Thank you. Appreciate it. Bye -bye. Alright

36:20

next question is from John in

36:22

New England or John E Trump's

36:24

idea of a golden dome and

36:27

the idea that China and Russia

36:29

and the USA could slash military

36:31

budgets by 50 % aren't those

36:34

ideas in opposition and Can you

36:36

explain to us how missile defense

36:38

affects arms treaties? I

36:42

mean in theory they

36:44

are in opposition, but

36:47

a lot of our

36:50

military budget is you

36:52

know towards maintaining sufficient

36:55

military power globally and

36:58

the ability to reinforce

37:00

globally. And

37:03

if we, for instance, disentangle ourselves

37:05

from Europe, from NATO, from

37:07

the Middle East, from Africa,

37:10

we don't have to keep

37:13

these forward forces deployed. That's

37:15

very expensive. The

37:19

money that is saved from that

37:21

can be used to beef up

37:23

other areas. But he's talking about

37:25

slashing the defense. You

37:29

know, I'm not a fan of missile defense.

37:31

I think history has shown that it just

37:33

doesn't work. And all

37:35

it does is lead to a greater arms

37:38

race. But if I

37:40

recall, in 1986,

37:44

Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev met in Reykjavik,

37:46

Iceland, and both of them were on the

37:48

verge of saying, hey, let's get rid of

37:50

all nuclear weapons. And the killer was that

37:52

Gorbachev said to it, but you can't have

37:54

strategic defense initiatives. And Reagan

37:56

went, I gotta have it. And

37:59

Gorbachev, unfortunately, said,

38:02

well, then we can't have

38:04

the sweeping disarmament. When he

38:06

got back, Sakharov and other

38:08

experts said, STI will never

38:10

work. go back and

38:12

say you want the disarmament. But

38:15

when he came back by that time, the

38:17

conservatives, you know, Richard

38:19

Perl and others had already gotten back

38:21

to Reagan and got him the change

38:23

of mind. I think we

38:25

can have nuclear disarmament and have the

38:27

United States waste a trillion dollars on

38:30

them. on missile defense. I don't

38:32

think the Russians are worried about missile defense.

38:34

The Russians have built systems that can defeat

38:36

any missile defense system out there in the

38:38

United States. It's just, it's an

38:40

impossibility. Every defense, there is a counter to it.

38:42

There's no perfect defense and there won't be a

38:44

golden dough. But if Donald Trump

38:47

wants to, you know, invest money in that,

38:49

make the American people feel, you know. this

38:52

artificial sense of safety. I think

38:54

what will happen is the Golden Dome

38:56

will collapse under its own inefficiencies

38:58

at some point in time as the

39:00

missile systems fail, their tests fail,

39:03

their tests fail, their tests will realize

39:05

that we're better off having genuine

39:07

arms control than trying to push for

39:09

missile defenses in which by its

39:11

very nature requires our opponents to maintain

39:14

a certain level of strategic strike

39:16

capacity, sufficient strike capacity to Defeat the

39:18

missile system and if we build

39:20

a better missile system then they end

39:22

up building more missiles. You can't have

39:25

arms control and missile defense at the

39:27

same time Okay, I saw one comment

39:29

in response to that rumble issue

39:31

and the suggestion is to refresh your

39:34

screen and that might solve the problem

39:36

Let me ask one more time. No,

39:38

is there anybody in the rumble audience

39:41

who does refresh the screen and

39:43

still can't see? the beginning of our

39:45

show until several minutes into it. Trying

39:47

to find out if it's just this

39:50

one individual who's having the problem or

39:52

others too. Matt in

39:54

Vermont, when will Russian vodka be

39:57

back on the store shelves? I

40:00

would imagine as soon as it's legally able

40:02

to be imported in the United States. Without

40:08

giving away the farm, I

40:12

talked to various

40:15

people And they

40:17

are talking weeks,

40:21

maybe a couple months

40:23

before sanctions are lifted

40:25

and things start heading

40:27

back towards normal. I

40:30

think a lot of this will be impacted by

40:32

what's going on in Saudi Arabia right now. I

40:36

understand the Ukrainians have agreed to

40:38

some sort of ceasefire proposal, a

40:40

30 day pause before they get

40:43

to you know

40:45

to discuss and I think

40:47

the Russians are going to

40:50

reject that and we have

40:52

to see how the United

40:55

States handles that rejection you

40:57

know so but both Americans

41:00

and Russians seem to be

41:02

moving in the direction to

41:05

have sanctions beginning to be

41:07

lifted sometime around May June

41:10

time Time period and

41:12

if that happens, I would imagine

41:14

that you can find follows of

41:16

Russian standard back on the American

41:18

liquor shelves All right when you

41:21

go to the Russian Embassy and

41:23

do shots what kind of vodka

41:25

is that? Sure

41:27

Russian vodka, but see they

41:29

have diplomatic pouches they can

41:31

bring in there All right,

41:33

so some people are saying

41:35

Al Rumble is just glitchy

41:37

maybe try another channel If

41:40

you go to scotrider .com you

41:42

can watch it there also at

41:44

the very top of scotrider .com

41:47

There's links to all our different

41:49

social media channels. So maybe try

41:51

another one and The next question

41:54

is from Kamiah Brodersen in Denmark

41:56

if the US exits NATO I

41:58

suspect that the remains of NATO

42:00

or a newly formed EU equivalent

42:03

would accept Ukraine into the alliance, which

42:06

would be the straight path to World

42:08

War III. Is there any way to

42:10

stop such a development? Absolutely,

42:13

and it will happen. Whatever

42:16

peace agreement that is reached will

42:18

be in the form of a

42:20

treaty, and that treaty will compel

42:22

Ukraine by treaty to neutrality. And

42:26

the Ukrainian government will be

42:28

expected to respect this neutrality.

42:31

Moreover, I would imagine that the Ukrainian

42:33

government will be a government that's handpicked

42:35

by the victor, that's Russia, to

42:38

avoid any temptations

42:40

of this nature.

42:44

You know, NATO can

42:46

basically say, you

42:48

know, we want Ukraine, but if Ukraine says we don't want

42:50

to be a member, you know, NATO can't vote them in

42:52

and make them a member, although they don't want to be

42:55

one. So, you know, I

42:58

saw that the Rubio bill, that just

43:00

means that Congress has to approve. Trust

43:02

me, President Trump, if Europe

43:04

continues to do what they're doing and

43:06

posture the way they're doing, Trump

43:08

will be able to make a compelling

43:11

case that the United States and NATO

43:13

are no longer compatible and one can't

43:15

expect compatibility to emerge in the coming

43:18

years and that it's better for the

43:20

United States both in terms of fiscal

43:22

responsibility and in looking out for our

43:24

legitimate national security interests to pull out

43:27

of NATO. And I think Congress will

43:29

go along with that. But you're right.

43:31

I'll need congressional approval to do that.

43:34

But Trump can do a number of

43:36

things, such as begin to withdraw US

43:38

troops from NATO, redeploy

43:41

American assets, et

43:43

cetera. We're

43:45

not held hostage. NATO is not holding us hostage.

43:49

All right. Let's go to

43:52

Wenji. I guess that's how

43:54

it's pronounced in Texas. Trump

43:56

threatens to impose large -scale

43:58

sanctions on Russia until a

44:00

peace agreement with Ukraine is

44:02

reached. How would Russia be

44:04

affected if more sanctions are imposed? Will

44:07

Trump's statement affect Russia's trust

44:09

in Trump? Well,

44:14

first of all, I don't think

44:16

the Russians trust anybody that has

44:18

American passport. We

44:21

haven't earned that trust. And

44:23

when they speak of trust,

44:25

they say trust, but verify the

44:27

old INF Treaty slogan. And

44:30

the key aspect of verification is

44:32

to see how the United States

44:34

behaves. If

44:37

all these words and gestures and

44:39

things the United States have made

44:42

become undone because the United

44:44

States ultimately is trying to

44:47

play a leverage game by

44:49

being seen as, you know,

44:51

threatening Ukraine with certain, you

44:53

know, punishments to get Ukraine to

44:56

commit to a peace plan, which is unacceptable to

44:58

Russia. But now say to Russia, you have to

45:00

accept this peace plan because, you know, or else

45:02

we're going to do this. The Russians are going

45:04

to be like, Why

45:07

weren't you just honest from the

45:09

start and say that's what you

45:11

wanted so we could say no

45:14

and we didn't have to waste

45:16

anybody's time So we'll find out

45:18

I think I'm hopeful that the

45:20

the Trump administration understands that Russia

45:23

has hard fast preconditions that are

45:25

non -negotiable and I believe one

45:27

of those is that you can't

45:29

have a ceasefire and Not have

45:32

a locked -in agreement Right

45:34

now that appears to be what the Trump

45:36

administration is trying to feed Russia. A 30

45:38

-day ceasefire that Ukraine's ready to sign up.

45:41

Why wouldn't they? It's a ceasefire. It's

45:43

a pause for the cause. They get to rotate

45:45

their units out. They get to rearm, re -equip,

45:47

dig in, do all that kind of stuff. All

45:49

the momentum that Russia has gained stops. And

45:52

then Russia has to regain that, which means they

45:54

have to sacrifice more people if the thing goes

45:56

up. Why would Russia ever

45:59

agree to that? So I don't think Russia will.

46:01

The question now is the Trump administration to go

46:03

back to the Ukrainians and say, well, no, we're

46:05

going to do this. Or they're going to say,

46:07

oh, no, Russia, we're going to sanction you. If

46:09

they begin in the game of sanctioning Russia, then

46:12

Russia knows that the Trump administration is not serious

46:14

about peace. I think the Trump

46:16

administration is serious about peace. We have Steve

46:18

Wittkopf flying to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin.

46:21

He's the man who Trump trusts. And

46:23

I would imagine that he's there to

46:26

have a discussion with Putin

46:28

about what your red lines

46:30

are and how we can

46:32

get to a termination of

46:34

the conflict, what Russia needs

46:36

to do this, to bypass

46:38

the negotiation taking place and

46:40

just get straight to the

46:42

Russian red line. We'll see.

46:46

All right, I'd like to thank the

46:48

audience for putting up with my many

46:50

imperfections. And now let's bring things up

46:52

a notch with a perfect 10 minutes.

46:54

Yelena the Magnificent with questions that have

46:56

come in on live chat while Scott

46:58

and I have been talking. Hello,

47:09

everyone. Hello, Scott. Hello,

47:12

Yelena. Nice hat. Thanks.

47:16

Here are a lot of questions, most

47:18

a lot of them overlap, but

47:20

people would like to see you. Summerville

47:23

Joan on rumble right Scott will

47:26

the largest ever Ukrainian drone

47:28

attack on Moscow which kills three

47:30

civilians and injured nine affect the

47:32

meeting today in Saudi Arabia while

47:35

it's obviously didn't affect and Is

47:37

this a terrorist attack? Well,

47:41

I don't think it impacted the

47:43

meeting today. I think the meeting

47:45

took place. I think the Russians

47:47

aren't going to let the Ukrainians

47:50

dictate outcomes or or influence positions.

47:54

Look, this is a massive

47:56

attack of over 300 nearly

47:58

400 drones were used in

48:00

this attack and it struck

48:02

civilian targets in Moscow. So

48:04

it is a terrorist attack

48:06

unless the Ukrainians can demonstrate

48:09

that they were trying to

48:11

hit a military target. It

48:14

just seems to me they went out

48:16

of the way just to blindly strike

48:18

Moscow in an effort to make a

48:20

statement that Moscow is not safe. Therefore,

48:23

Russia should be suing for peace. From

48:29

the big picture, I

48:31

think if this negotiation

48:33

continues to move in

48:35

a direction that's acceptable

48:38

to Russia, I

48:40

don't see a... I mean,

48:42

I do see Russia retaliating,

48:44

but I see it as

48:46

a standard retaliation more. Giron

48:48

drones, Iskandar, things of that

48:50

nature, maybe some Kinzals.

48:53

But if the

48:55

negotiations stall and

48:57

Ukraine continues to

49:00

attack Moscow, I

49:02

really could see an aeration

49:05

of 2 .0 this time,

49:07

you know, resulting

49:10

in... consequences for Ukraine. And it

49:12

puts Ukraine, Europe, and the United

49:14

States on notice that if you

49:16

want to continue this war, we

49:18

can continue and we can actually

49:20

run it up a couple notches.

49:23

I think right now, Donald

49:25

Trump is laboring under this

49:27

false notion that Russia has

49:29

somehow hurt and desperate for

49:31

peace. And if he

49:33

starts playing negotiating games, then it might be time

49:35

for Russia just to put a marker on the

49:38

table and say, nah. We can take this as

49:40

far as you want it. And also put a

49:42

marker on Europe that what we're about to do

49:44

to Kiev, we could do to Paris, we could

49:46

do to Berlin, we can do to London, we

49:48

could do to any European city, any time we

49:50

want. And that is to level a central part

49:53

of the town using the Ereshnik. That's

49:56

just what I would be advising, but Russians or Russians,

49:58

they get to do whatever they want. OK,

50:02

thanks. The next question

50:04

comes from Shavir 281

50:06

on Rumble. Scott,

50:09

give us your stake on the

50:11

Russian special forces pipeline operation in

50:13

the Kursk region. My

50:17

take. It's outlandish.

50:19

It's crazy. It's

50:22

cinematic. They should make a movie

50:24

about this. And hopefully they will make a movie

50:26

about this. It was bold. It

50:28

was a game changer. I mean,

50:31

we're talking about Ukrainians being dug

50:33

into a urban environment that Russia

50:35

would be called upon to level.

50:38

street -to -street fighting, house -to -house fighting,

50:41

where this village, this town, would

50:43

suffer the fate of Mariupol because

50:45

of Ukrainian fanatics dug in through

50:47

this pipeline operation. And it's not

50:49

just the Sudezh, it's the surrounding

50:52

villages, too, that Russia would have

50:54

to fight through. Through

50:56

this pipeline operation, Russia got into

50:58

the rear area, disrupted and put

51:00

panic, and the Ukrainian defenses collapsed.

51:04

Thousands of lives were saved on both

51:06

sides. The Ukrainians right now are pouring

51:08

out as they've given up. They're just

51:10

done. They're

51:13

in an indefensible position and the

51:15

Russians have the momentum. And this

51:18

is good for morale. This is

51:20

one of those boosts done on

51:22

International Women's Day. I thought the

51:25

videos of the boys sending wishes

51:27

to their wives and their girlfriends

51:29

and women from inside out. gas

51:31

pipeline as they were moving 15

51:34

kilometers. It just shows

51:36

the fighting spirit of the Russians. It's

51:40

a major deal. It's a

51:43

big victory. It's one

51:45

of those military operations

51:47

that truly had a

51:50

major impact on the

51:52

operations and ultimately the

51:54

strategic outcome because they

51:57

unhinged the Ukrainian defenses at a

52:00

moment when Ukraine was still holding

52:02

on to hopes that, you know,

52:04

curse -colding out could be a

52:06

negotiating chip. You know,

52:08

if the Ukrainians dug in the Sudezh and

52:10

started repelling the tax and rushing through our

52:13

house, losing men and fighting its ugly battle,

52:15

the Ukrainians could say, we could bring this

52:18

soon in with a ceasefire, ceasefire. what

52:21

the Russians did is they

52:23

eliminated that possibility for the

52:25

Ukrainians. So this has strategic

52:27

operation or tactical and propaganda

52:29

value. I mean, this is

52:31

a propaganda home run for

52:33

the Russians. Thanks

52:36

a lot. Now, questions from

52:38

Facebook by Leah Erasga. What

52:40

can you say about the

52:42

arrest of former president Duterte

52:45

by the ICC? The

52:51

man's been alleged to have been responsible

52:53

for 30 ,000 extrajudicial murders in the

52:55

Philippines while he was the president of

52:57

the Philippines. These

53:00

are crimes of immense

53:02

scale, scope and scale.

53:06

And clearly the ICC feels

53:09

that these crimes and the

53:11

circumstances of these crimes falls

53:13

within their jurisdiction and they

53:15

issued an arrest warrant. The

53:17

Philippines could have rejected the

53:19

arrest warrant and said, no,

53:21

we don't recognize this. They

53:23

would have been backed up

53:25

by the United States on

53:27

this. Because

53:30

it's not the kind of precedent

53:32

the United States wants or any

53:34

nation wants where former heads of

53:36

state are taken into custody because

53:38

of an ICC warrant. Apparently,

53:42

the Filipino government today feels that

53:44

Duarte deserves this, that the Filipino

53:46

court system is incapable of administering

53:49

justice, and that the ICC is

53:51

the appropriate jurisdiction for such a

53:53

trial. This is

53:55

an issue of Filipino sovereignty. Only

53:58

the Filipinos really get the way

54:00

in on this. And because I

54:03

believe that sovereign nations have a

54:05

right to express their sovereignty as

54:07

they wish, I'm

54:09

supporting the Filipino government

54:12

and its actions. I

54:15

do believe that they are incapable of

54:18

providing genuine justice. I'm not talking about

54:20

revenge. I'm not talking about a kangaroo

54:22

court. I'm talking about genuine justice. I

54:24

don't believe that Duarte can get a

54:27

fair trial in the Philippines today. I

54:30

do believe that the

54:32

allegations against him are

54:34

well -founded with evidence.

54:37

And therefore, this isn't just

54:40

a politicized gesture that there's

54:42

the allegations of real crimes

54:44

having been committed, real crimes

54:46

that require real justice, and

54:48

the Filipinos can't provide that justice. Therefore,

54:52

the ICC appears to be the

54:54

appropriate jurisdiction. And as long

54:56

as the Filipino government and the Filipino

54:58

people are happy with this outcome, who

55:01

am I to oppose it? Thanks.

55:04

I have we still have time

55:07

for one more last question that

55:09

comes from Mayan Yusuf Anaks. Trump

55:11

has insisted that Iran must denuclearize.

55:14

Would Iran be open to denuclearization

55:16

on the conditions that Israel also

55:18

does? Would the US be open

55:21

to this idea? Well,

55:24

I'm sure Iran would be open

55:26

to negotiations of that nature. Here's

55:29

the problem. Israel

55:32

is not a signatory to

55:34

the Nuclear Non -Proliferation Treaty

55:36

and however the world deals

55:38

with Israel's incompatibility with the

55:40

goals of global non -proliferation,

55:43

it's totally separate from

55:46

the Iranian case. Iran

55:49

signed the Nuclear Non -Proliferation Treaty

55:51

and is obliged to comply with

55:53

it and nowhere in there is

55:55

there a carve -out that says,

55:58

so long as Israel refuses to

56:00

join the nuclear amplification treaty, that

56:02

gives Iran a right to violate

56:04

it. I'm not saying

56:06

that Iran is in violation of

56:08

it. I'm just saying that under

56:11

no circumstances can anybody who believes

56:13

in the integrity of the NPT

56:15

allow enforcement of the NPT to

56:17

be colored by the Israeli issue.

56:19

That's a separate political issue. It's

56:21

a serious one that needs to

56:23

be addressed. There's no

56:25

linkage whatsoever between the Iranian

56:27

case and Israel from a

56:29

legal standpoint. I

56:32

do think that Iran has been

56:34

its own worst enemy in this

56:37

and that they have made numerous

56:39

statements at very senior levels about

56:41

how they are on the cusp

56:44

of being a nuclear weapons state,

56:46

that they could develop a nuclear

56:49

bomb within days. That's

56:52

not a position anybody in the world

56:54

should be comfortable with if you believe

56:56

in nuclear non -proliferation. And

56:59

I believe that the Trump administration

57:01

is looking to bring an end

57:03

to this situation. Iran should not

57:06

be pursuing a nuclear weapon and

57:08

should not be allowing itself to

57:10

be in a position where if

57:12

a political decision was made to

57:15

acquire a nuclear weapon, it could

57:17

acquire a nuclear weapon. That's not

57:19

a peaceful nuclear program. That's a

57:21

military program that's in place on

57:24

standby. And

57:26

the world can't be comfortable with that. I'm

57:28

sympathetic to the Iranian position. I'm

57:30

not in favor of the targeting

57:32

of Iran. I think we got

57:34

where we're at because of the

57:37

inconsistency of American policy. But

57:39

at the end of the day, I

57:42

do think that Iran's nuclear program

57:44

has to be, they

57:46

have to find the reverse gear. I

57:48

think Russia is working in that direction. China is trying

57:50

to help. And if the

57:52

Trump administration can find a way

57:55

to stop threatening Iran and maybe

57:57

focus more on diplomacy than military

57:59

threats, there might

58:01

be a path for that. But Iran isn't going

58:03

to respond well to threats. And

58:05

so I'm very concerned about the

58:08

situation devolving into actual conflict. And

58:11

there you have it, the perfect 10

58:13

with Yelena the Magnificent and our favorite

58:15

weapons inspector. Before we

58:17

say bye -bye, I would like

58:19

to remind our audience that Scott

58:21

has a new article out on

58:24

Scott Ritter Extra, the sub -stack

58:26

blog, which you can get to

58:28

on sub -stack or at scottridder

58:30

.com, so check that out. Perfidious.

58:32

Awesome. And

58:34

also we have... Some

58:37

of these autographed books a few still

58:39

left the ones that are autographed by

58:41

both Scott and Anya covering Ukraine and

58:43

We have some very interesting things in

58:46

the works. I don't know if you

58:48

want to drop a hint yet about

58:50

the one where that's coming very soon

58:52

Scott But I'll leave that up to

58:54

you But in any case we could

58:57

use your financial support one which which

58:59

one which one which one We have

59:01

three well, well, I'm aware of the

59:04

russia house is already

59:06

on there's another one

59:08

coming that one oh

59:11

well oh that yeah

59:13

you mean the the

59:15

the new the new

59:17

podcast yes yes yes

59:19

yes we are on

59:21

the cusp of um

59:23

starting a new podcast

59:25

called trump watch with

59:27

scott ridder and um

59:29

i think jeff jeff

59:32

Do you have a graphic you're going to put up?

59:34

I see your eyes flashing like... No, in fact, I

59:36

wasn't sure you even wanted to mention it yet. That's

59:38

why I didn't say the name. I

59:40

figured since you're pushing me, I have to.

59:43

I mean, I'm being prodded. I mean, walk

59:45

the plank, Ritter, walk the plank. We could

59:47

have given them a little hint or something,

59:49

but anyway. Well, I'm not good at hints.

59:52

I'm going to straighten your face. Now, Trump

59:54

watch. is a podcast, it'll

59:56

be a weekly show, interview

59:59

-based, but the idea

1:00:01

is it's a weekly

1:00:03

report card on Trump,

1:00:05

on the Trump presidency.

1:00:08

And no issue is out of bounds. It's

1:00:11

not meant to be a partisan.

1:00:14

I know a lot of people are going, ah,

1:00:16

you drank that Trump Kool -Aid. Or

1:00:19

there might be a few people out there

1:00:21

going, you hate Donald Trump. Well, the fact

1:00:23

that people might think both means it's good.

1:00:25

No, I'm going to be approaching this from

1:00:28

the standpoint of the neutral observer, the inspector,

1:00:30

fact -based only. But

1:00:32

we will be bringing on guests who do have

1:00:34

biases. And if I

1:00:36

bring on a guest who has

1:00:38

an anti -Trump bias, I will

1:00:40

be pushing back, not aggressively, but

1:00:42

just challenging their things

1:00:45

to encourage a debate, a discussion, a

1:00:47

dialogue. And if we bring on somebody

1:00:49

who has a pro -Trump bias, I'll

1:00:51

be doing the same thing. The idea

1:00:53

is not to sit there and just

1:00:55

become an echo chamber, but to actually

1:00:57

do a report card to say, hey,

1:01:01

on the issue of deportation,

1:01:04

let's talk about this. Let's talk

1:01:06

about what One of

1:01:08

the things is to see what did Donald

1:01:10

Trump say? What is the policy supposed to

1:01:12

be? And is he living up to that?

1:01:15

And if he is, that's sort of like

1:01:18

an A. Then we can

1:01:20

ask the next question, is this

1:01:22

good policy? But that's a different

1:01:24

discussion. But we're going to be

1:01:26

doing a multifaceted approach to addressing

1:01:29

Trump's presidency. And

1:01:31

I'm looking forward to it. I think that we that

1:01:34

this is going to be exciting. We have some people that have

1:01:36

already indicated they'd like to come on the show. And

1:01:39

we're just going to have good discussion,

1:01:41

which is what we need right now.

1:01:43

You know, even on X, which is,

1:01:45

you know, a free speech platform and

1:01:48

all that, it's impossible to have a

1:01:50

meaningful dialogue about Donald Trump, because the

1:01:52

moment you're saying, hey, did a good

1:01:54

job. You're a Trump cheerleader. And the

1:01:56

moment you, you know, say something, you

1:01:58

have Trump derangement syndrome. And it's very

1:02:01

difficult to work through that. That

1:02:03

chap to the wheat so you

1:02:06

know Trump watch is designed to

1:02:08

do just that we're gonna try

1:02:10

and get to you know the

1:02:12

the hard factual foundation of is

1:02:15

Trump living up to his promises

1:02:17

and Is are the policies being

1:02:19

pursued by Trump? Really designed

1:02:21

to make America great again, or are they

1:02:23

taking us in a different direction? These are

1:02:25

fair questions and we'll be looking for fair

1:02:27

answers Yeah, I'm really looking

1:02:30

forward to I think it's going to

1:02:32

be a hit I think you're the

1:02:34

perfect host for this Scott because despite

1:02:37

what some people say You sometimes praise

1:02:39

Trump and you sometimes criticize him and

1:02:41

that's about the best that can be

1:02:44

done with something like this No, it's

1:02:48

all right. We're getting close Just

1:02:50

so you know we should mention

1:02:52

that one of the best parts

1:02:55

of the show is that I

1:02:57

will not be on camera strictly

1:02:59

behind the scenes so I'm sure

1:03:02

that we've we've eliminated Jeff's Sonoros

1:03:04

voice, but you'll you'll you'll see

1:03:06

his presence behind screen with the

1:03:09

quality You know production values that'll

1:03:11

be put into this show This

1:03:13

will be on X and it

1:03:16

will be a subscription based You

1:03:18

know podcast sorry guys, but that's

1:03:20

just the way the world the

1:03:23

way the world runs but I

1:03:25

think You

1:03:27

know for whatever we end

1:03:29

up charging which won't be

1:03:32

much It's it's an investment.

1:03:34

That's that's that's worth it

1:03:36

You know, but we're at

1:03:38

the point now where you

1:03:41

know, we have maxed out

1:03:43

our ability to to generate

1:03:45

No cost Stuff if we're

1:03:47

going to expand We're getting

1:03:49

to point at any expansion

1:03:52

becomes impossible unless there's income

1:03:54

generation and You

1:03:56

know YouTube is dead to

1:03:58

us So there goes that

1:04:01

and it's difficult to to

1:04:03

generate income You know elsewhere

1:04:05

without putting things behind a

1:04:07

paywall which we've so far

1:04:09

been resistant of doing but

1:04:11

Trump watch that we already

1:04:14

have running will remain free

1:04:16

correct correct, but but this

1:04:18

one we're taking it up

1:04:20

a notch or two in

1:04:22

terms of production value and

1:04:25

in the quality of the program. I

1:04:28

mean, not that this doesn't have quality,

1:04:30

but this is free -willing. This is

1:04:32

how quickly he corrects himself. A free

1:04:34

-willing show here. Not

1:04:36

low production values. We have

1:04:39

high production values, but low

1:04:41

production costs. This

1:04:44

show is something that we can

1:04:46

produce without going bankrupt. But

1:04:49

if we're going to do something like

1:04:51

the Russia House or Trump Watch, It's

1:04:54

got to have its own independent

1:04:56

income stream to keep it going.

1:04:59

So just let everybody know that

1:05:01

when it comes, it'll be out

1:05:03

on X. And you'll

1:05:05

have to pay whatever we end

1:05:08

up deciding the subscription will be.

1:05:10

Nothing expensive, maybe $300 a month.

1:05:13

How much? No, I was kidding.

1:05:15

$300 a month, I was kidding. No,

1:05:17

I was thinking 3 .99, but people

1:05:19

are telling me that's way too low.

1:05:22

Single digits, 110. All

1:05:25

right, well, we have

1:05:27

to figure that part out. All right,

1:05:29

well, thanks, Yelena and Scott, and thanks

1:05:31

to our beloved audience. Please join us

1:05:33

on the winers Thursday night at 7

1:05:35

p .m. Eastern Time and then the

1:05:38

loquacious version of Ask the Inspector Friday

1:05:40

night at 8 p .m. Eastern Time.

1:05:42

Till then, take care, everybody. my

1:05:47

shirt so sexy

1:05:50

it hurts I'm

1:06:00

too sexy for my

1:06:02

shirt, too sexy for

1:06:04

my shirt, so sexy

1:06:06

it hurts. Yeah,

1:06:08

baby!