Host or Analyst (3:35)
Everyone believed that we were close to the signing of this deal when things devolved. It may still come to a quick resolution this week, but right now, it's very important for those that are defending or attacking President Trump for this to point out what they see as a different, more realistic path forward. President Trump's argument is, short of working with us, short of having this deal, there is no path forward that minimizes death among the Ukrainian people. And that's what President Trump's priority's been, whether you believe him or not. The third point that I want to make here that I think is really important is analyzing Europe's role in this. On Sunday, President Zelensky met with European leaders in London to talk about Europe's new role. They've described themselves now as having to step in in the absence of America and help navigate this. And I think a lot of people here are saying, why did it take so long? Why did it take this explosive Oval Office meeting for Europe to step up and really contribute more to a conflict happening in their backyard? And as you see, European leaders say, you know, we're going to step in now and win this. Most Americans are saying, that's what we've been asking for now for three years. But there are a few challenges there. One, the European Union spent more money last year on Russian oil and gas than they did in aid to Ukraine. Two, the European Union spent more on climate change in 2023 by a wide margin than they spent on aid to Ukraine. They need to figure out their own economic priorities before really being able to say, we're the ones who are gonna save the day here. And as Keir Starmer, the prime Minister of the UK Said yesterday, America will need to be involved, play a role. So the question is, when do we get to that next phase? The other big issue right now for the European Union, they're attempting to force their own ESG and climate standards on American companies here. 26 state financial officers wrote letters to the Trump administration asking them to investigate this because it seems to run counter to President Trump's energy renaissance priorities. Tonight, President Trump is going to address the American people. I think we all can imagine that this Ukraine conflict will be a part of that. But I think he's also gonna take some big victory laps first, probably on the border. That was one of the biggest issues that he talked about on the campaign trail and one of the biggest priorities for voters. While that issue isn't done or finished, I think he can really point to major progress as this last month, we saw some of the lowest numbers of border crossings we've seen in decades. A huge victory. That shows his strategy of coming in saying, we're going to close the border and remove all dangerous criminal, illegal immigrants as quickly as possible, contrast to President Biden coming into office saying, we're going to make it impossible to deport people. He actually promised a freeze on deportations, opening the border, and then also hamstringing our own border enforcement. That created a magnet for the immigration crisis we saw. I think President Trump will also take the opportunity to shout out his guests to have some theater. He loves to do that. He's quite the showman. The other issue that he's going to talk about is his plan to lower costs. Just over the weekend, Treasury Secretary Bessant announced that they would be naming an affordability czar, somebody whose job would be to find five to eight points of the economy where they can focus on affordability for the American people for their everyday goods. We saw polling from CBS over the weekend that showed President Trump's approval rating on handling the economy is still positive, but his handling of lowering prices has taken a little bit of a hit. I think most people still understand that he inherited a terrible economy from President Biden with a lot of policies, including slaughtering of chickens because of bird flu. And things like that that led to rise in egg prices. Things as he shows focus on this issue in the speech tomorrow. And going forward, I expect those approval numbers to change quite a bit. This week, the Senate is taking up a bill from Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville focused on protecting women's sports. As you know, this issue has shifted dramatically in the last 10 years. Ten years ago, you might have seen a lot of people who said this isn't a big deal or this is abstract or let the boys play with the girls. It's not a big deal. What has shifted is the American people have seen real life examples of this. Everything from Lia Thomas, a biological male winning a women's swimming championship, to a San Jose State volleyball player named Blair Fleming, who was seen hitting the ball so powerfully that teams forfeited the games. And the San Jose State volleyball team won a number of games just because teams didn't want to put their players in danger of competing against a biological male. And so as this has become more real, we've seen an incredibly powerful political backlash to it. New York times polling showed 80% of people don't believe biological males should be allowed to compete against females. But this gets even more interesting when you go state by state. Georgia expected to have one of the closest Senate elections this year. 73% support a ban on biological males competing in women's sports. In Michigan, it's 78%. In Nevada, 72%. In Arizona, it's 70%. And in the state of New Hampshire, a very moderate state, 54% said they would be less likely to vote for an elected official who voted to allow men to compete against women. You'll remember this was a major campaign issue in 2024. If you watched these Pennsylvania Senate RA one of the closest contested races and most important of the cycle. Senator Bob Casey, now former Senator Bob Casey, had to run an ad the last week of the campaign trying to defend himself after he had voted and written letters in support of allowing men to compete in women's sports. That was a huge political loser for him. And as you know, he is no longer a senator. Last of all, I want to talk about BlackRock. Wall Street Journal had a piece over the weekend saying blackrock's woke era is over. First, it's really important to note this didn't happen overnight. There are groups like Consumers Research, led by Will Hild, who has put about three years of work into this. Even before anyone knew who blackrock was, they were running advertisements saying, blackrock is giving your money to China. BlackRock is pushing ESG policies that are driving up inflation, hurting your family. They have now, after three years, gotten to the point where woke fund managers like Larry Fink are seeing putting politics ahead of delivering for shareholders and for consumers as a loser. But the most important part of this is the fact that this fight isn't actually over, despite what the Wall Street Journal reported. You can expect that people like blackrock are going to put these woke practices into storage until a Democrat's back in office, and then they're going to reactivate them and try and use them again to push their agendas on the American people. So please, never take your foot off the gas. That's true of so many different policies you're seeing right now. Make sure that these shifts are real, not just things that you are going to see go into hibernation and come back in action later. This has been 10 minute drill. Thank you so much for joining us today. Please like subscribe, follow us on YouTube, Rumble, Instagram, Twitter, Apple Podcasts. Like subscribe tell your friends. Thank you again for joining us. We'll see you on Thursday.
