찰스 페인, 폭스 뉴스 앵커: 이 계약은 수요일 학교 이사회와 루이빌 대학교 체육 협회 이사회의 특별 합동 회의 후에 발표되었습니다. — 인용문 — “이 계약은 수요일 학교 이사회와 루이빌 대학교 체육 협회 이사회의 특별 합동 회의 후에 발표되었습니다.,” warning there will be enormous consequences for Russia if that happens.
All this as another U.S. cargo plane arrives in Ukraine today carrying anti-tank missiles, and the president says some U.S. troops could be moved into the region near-term, but not into Ukraine.
And we are all over it with British Ambassador to the United States Karen Pierce on where things stand right now, and Senator Jim Risch on the GOP push for Russian sanctions right now.
어서 오십시오, 여러분. I’m Charles Payne, in for Neil Cavuto, and this is “너의 세상.”
First to Greg Palkot, who is reporting from Kiev inside Ukraine — 그렉.
GREG PALKOT, 폭스 뉴스 기자: 야, Charles. 좋아요.
미국. is leading all sorts of efforts to try to head off a possible invasion amidst some worrying reports, as well as some ominous signs of that incursion. British sources say 30 trainloads of Russian troops and gear are now deployed to neighboring Belarus, 60 Russian battle groups surrounding Ukraine, even some Russian advanced troops possibly already here.
This as efforts to evacuate Americans ramp up.
FOX News has learned 200 American diplomats and families are leaving this week. But there are reportedly 20,000 American expats in Ukraine. The message today from the embassy on a conference call was, leave now.
과, 예, we saw another shipment of U.S. military aid arrive here tonight, part of a $ 200 million commitment of lethal items for Ukrainian forces, 미국과 함께. and NATO troops and gear also on standby, as the government here, Charles, tries to tamp down fears of an imminent invasion.
Others not so sure. Listen to the take of the very well-connected editor in chief of The Kyiv Post.
(비디오 클립 시작)
PALKOT: Do you think the Russians will invade?
BOHDAN NAHAYLO, EDITOR IN CHIEF, KYIV POST: Two weeks ago, three weeks ago, nobody really believed it. They felt that Putin was bluffing.
그러나, with each day, I think the possibility of that happening becomes more of a reality.
(비디오 클립 종료)
PALKOT: If it’s any consolation, Charles, this very credible source says it’s not going to happen tomorrow or the next day. He thinks it could take three or four weeks.
But when it does, Ukraine will feel it — back to you.
PAYNE: 그렉, 매우 감사합니다.
Now I want to go to General Kellogg for what the president may do, what we may do and, 물론이야, what other forts might be used in this potential conflict.
Lieutenant General Keith Kellogg is with us now, 또한, we should note, former national security adviser for Vice President Pence.
General, thanks so much for joining the show.
The pieces are being moved into place. NATO’s moving pieces. Russia’s moving pieces. We are potentially moving pieces. Where do you see this going?
젠. KEITH KELLOGG (오른쪽.), FORMER ACTING U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: 예, thanks for having me, Charles. 감사합니다.
보기, I think the big day is going to be Friday. That’s the day we’re supposed to have responses to the questions that Foreign Minister Lavrov of Russia gave to Secretary of State Tony Blinken last week. 그리고 그는 말했다, these are the demands that Russia has.
그리고, 금요일에, we will know what our response is. And the biggest question we have — or they gave us is, under Article 4, when they asked a question, that we don’t want any more eastward expansion of NATO, and that means Ukraine.
And if we say no, I think what’s going to happen — no to their demand — I think then the possibility of war really grows. I think we can finesse it, 그러나, Charles. I really do. Ukraine right now is not postured to join NATO. They’re one of the most corrupt nations in the world. They are in the bottom third when it comes to nations on being corrupt.
사실로, there’s reports out that the only nation more corrupt than Ukraine happens to be Russia. And it takes all 30 nations of NATO to agree to admit a new member. There’s a lot of members of NATO that won’t want Ukraine in. One of them happens to be Germany.
And then it takes two-thirds of the U.S. Senate to approve another member joining NATO.
KELLOGG: So I think there’s a possibility that we can finesse it to the Russians and say, 보기, Ukraine is a sovereign state, but in the near term, they’re not going to become part of NATO.
So it’s going to come down to Friday. It’s going to come down to what our answer is going to be. And if we say you can’t tell us who belongs to NATO, I think the probability of a potential invasion goes way up.
PAYNE: What are the chances, even if we were to finesse it, to borrow your word here, that Vladimir Putin would still want some form of control?
I have been reading and hearing maybe a puppet-like government there, 그리고 아마도, 다만…
PAYNE: … 의도 된 말장난 없음, but an incursion, a minor incursion, not a full-fledged invasion.
KELLOGG: 예, I trust Vladimir Putin as about as far as I can throw the Empire State Building, and that’s not very far.
I think he still wants to go in. I think he wants to carve out the eastern part of Ukraine. And there’s a perfect demarcation line. If you look at the Dnieper River, that’s — and if he goes to the Dnieper River and goes to the east of that, he’s got one-third of Ukraine, and that gives him an incredible buffer against any type of eastward movement of NATO.
그래서, I think he wants to go regardless. I think he’s looking for every excuse in the world to go. It would be — it’s a lot larger than an incursion. But I think I know what he wants to do. And his forces right now are postured to do that. He’s gotten significantly — a significant number of horses, and they’re all high-quality forces as well.
PAYNE: I have got less than a minute to go.
If that were in case — the next move by Vladimir Putin, what would NATO do? What would the United States do?
KELLOGG: I don’t think NATO is going to do anything. NATO doesn’t want to do anything. 나는 생각한다 — don’t think you’re going to do anything. It’s not going to be an attack on NATO. It’s not going to be an offensive move on NATO.
There’s going to be an awful lot of posturing. But there’s not going to be a whole lot of action. I think they will let it slide. And that’s a huge mistake.
But I think that’s the way President Biden is. He’s going to let it slide. Everybody’s going to take the cue from the United States of America. And I think they’re just going to look the other way. There will be a lot of posturing. The Olympics are coming up. Be a lot of good reason to not pay attention what’s happening in the middle part of Europe.
PAYNE: 예. 잘, we saw this movie with Crimea not long ago.
KELLOGG: 예. 예.
PAYNE: General Kellogg, you very much. Appreciate it.
KELLOGG: 감사, Charles.
PAYNE: 괜찮아, 여러분, now to Britain’s response in these escalating tensions with Russia.
With me now, British Ambassador to the United States Karen Pierce.
대사, welcome to the show.
Do you believe the response by NATO allies so far is sufficient to deter Vladimir Putin?
KAREN PIERCE, BRITISH AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED STATES: 잘, thanks very much for having me.
And NATO is following this very closely, as you would expect. There’s a lot of planning going on, a lot of coordination going on. We’re in lockstep with the U.S. The prime minister took part in a video with President Biden, President Macron, chancellor in Germany and others yesterday.
We are also looking at sanctions. And we are making it clear to President Putin that we want to come — him to come to the diplomatic table and talk through the issues that he claims are causing him to threaten Ukraine.
PAYNE: 대사, you brought up potential sanctions.
에 2014, a lot of sanctions were thrown at Russia. Some estimates, say it took at least $ 50 billion a year off of their economy and hurt their GDP. 그걸 염두에 두고, should sanctions be used ahead of an invasion or held back?
PIERCE: 잘, 나는 생각한다, these sanctions, if there’s any incursion into Ukraine, the sanctions that we, the E.U. 그리고 미국. are looking at now will be very wide-ranging and in excess of 2014.
I think you heard Secretary Blinken say the other day that he didn’t want to impose sanctions in advance. He wants them to be a deterrent. Very important that we have credible deterrence. Also important that President Putin engages in diplomacy.
PAYNE: On the topic of credibility, 대사, there’s growing concern about Germany. Maybe they’re not fully on board. 물론이야, there’s always talk of unity.
But critics are blasting Germany for not going to the same lengths as some of their ally counterparts. Your reaction to that?
PIERCE: I think yesterday’s meeting, yesterday’s video between the leaders of U.S., 독일, 프랑스, Poland and the international organizations, like NATO, the E.U., the OSCE, everyone came out of that pointing to the total unanimity between all the leaders who were there.
And Germany has been an integral part of the discussions, integral parts of the planning. We work very closely with them and with our European and American partners.
NATO is very solid on this. What President Putin is trying to do is destabilize a sovereign country, 우크라이나, deprive it of the means to choose its future. 동시에, he wants to divide Europe.
그래서, just with reference to your previous interviewee, there will be a firm response from NATO, a very firm response.
PAYNE: 존경하는 마음으로 — 과, 물론이야, you’re an ambassador, so you’re always diplomatic.
There seems to be, 그러나, the idea that perhaps there is division already in Europe, and that’s actually emboldening Vladimir Putin, with Brexit, the battles that Britain has had, the isolation that the U.K. is going through with its European counterparts.
Many are saying that’s actually one of the key reasons Vladimir Putin feels empowered now. What do you say to that?
PIERCE: I don’t think it’s a case of him being empowered.
He’s an opportunist, I suspect. He’s probably got more than one goal in particular. 그러나, fundamentally, it’s about destabilizing Ukraine. It’s about trying to divide Europe again. There’s a great irony there, given that Europe came together after the collapse of the Soviet Union 1989 ...에 1991.
I don’t think it’s a case of feeling emboldened. And I don’t think President Putin should make the mistake of thinking Europe or the U.S. or NATO is distracted in any way.
Everybody is focused on what he’s doing. There’s no good reason to have over 100,000 troops on the Ukrainian border. He needs to de-escalate. He needs to end the war of disinformation. And he needs to come to the table and talk to us.
많이있다, many mechanisms.
PAYNE: 대사, 죄송 해요, but the White House today saying it’s rallying energy producers to divert natural gas to Europe if Russia does invade.
And that begs the question, is it time to end Europe’s overreliance on Russian energy?
PIERCE: There’s a very strong debate on that going on in Europe.
You will have heard what the German government said about reexamining Nord Stream 2 if President Putin invades. There is a very legitimate question about energy dependence that we are looking into.
But the immediate priority is to defuse the crisis and get President Putin to de-escalate.
PAYNE: Ambassador Pierce, thank you very much for your time, and we appreciate it.
PAYNE: 그래서, a group of eight senators meeting on Russia to slap on sanctions. How soon will they be? 잘, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, James Risch, is with us here.
그러나, 먼저, 조, 아니. The president ripping big companies with inflation soaring, but what about big D.C. 지출? 피터 두시, Karl Rove both coming up.
PAYNE: It was another wild day on Wall Street, stocks diving early in trading, then making another magnificent rebound, but finishing the day down.
Investors keeping an eye on what’s happening over in Ukraine and, 물론이야, [object Window], the Fed decision interest rates here at home. The Dow did fare the best, 쪽으로 900 points off the lows, still fell, but less than 1 퍼센트. Tech stocks, 하나, pulling the Nasdaq down more than 2 퍼센트.
Shop until you stop. A new report showing a drop in consumer confidence, as inflation keeps hitting Americans, this as the White House tries to stop the issue from hammering the president.
We’re going to be talking with Karl Rove about that in a moment, but first of FOX’s Peter Doocy at the White House with the very latest.
베드로, everywhere I turn, I see you, my man. You are doing a great job.
PETER DOOCY, FOX NEWS WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: 감사합니다, Charles.
과, yesterday, the White House had been hoping that the headline out of their event was their efforts to combat rising prices. And they are trying to crack down on big companies because they think they’re making it too expensive for consumers to fix stuff.
(비디오 클립 시작)
젠 프 사키, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: And tangible things are being able to buy hearing aids over the counter, being able to take some of your products and get them repaired anywhere you want without worrying about that being a challenge, making sure we’re taking steps to address lack of competition that is out there in a range of industries where prices are going up.
(비디오 클립 종료)
DOOCY: The Chamber of Commerce says that’s not how it works with this: “Inflation cannot be blamed on America’s businesses. The notion that consolidation in industries is driving the current surge in prices is simply wrong. It is pretty clear that the administration is attempting to use higher prices to justify their preexisting agenda. Such government intervention would likely further constrain supply and push prices even higher.”
잘, Americans want the administration to do something about inflation, more this month than last month. A new FOX News poll finds concern about inflation ticking up to 85 percent among voters. We’re also learning the president plans to huddle with CEOs here to hash out details of his Build Back Better plan.
The administration has talked about that as a way to bring down inflation. It’s just not clear what exactly they think CEOs are going to be able to do to combat inflation, because that’s one of the economic ills that they have been blaming for months on COVID — Charles.
PAYNE: 예, we’re seeing that right now in earnings season in the stock market, 베드로. It’s not pretty.
Thanks so much, my friend.
So I want to get right to Karl Rove, former deputy chief of staff for President George W. 부시, 또한, 물론이야, a FOX News contributor.
칼, the latest poll, FOX polling, shows most Americans are concerned about inflation. Many think it’s here to stay. And so what does that tell us about the White House, how it’s trying to handle this?
칼 로브, 폭스 뉴스 기고자: 잘, they’re tone-deaf, 때문에, if you went deeper, I would suspect most Americans would believe that the principal cause of inflation, 적어도 — not the exclusive cause this time around, but the principal cause is too much money chasing too few goods.
And part of that is a supply chain problem. But a big part of it is the government is pumping out money, spending money left and right. 과, 결과적으로, we have on the demand side a bigger demand than normal, and it’s chasing too few goods.
And you take the combination of the disruptions of COVID and then the government spending money it doesn’t have and borrowing from the future, thereby inflating the currency, and you got you got prices at the pump and the grocery store that are gobsmackingly big.
PAYNE: 예, gobsmacking is a great word for it.
You know what is interesting to me, 칼, 이다, to your point, Americans actually had an epiphany. And I think it might have not only surprised Democrats, but most political watchers when, after that first tranche, 그 $ 1.9 trillion went out a couple of months later, people were asked, do you want this — another tranche? And they said, 아니, it would hurt my family.
내말은, I saw polls from CNN, NBC, 워싱턴 포스트. 어쩐지, 내말은, I guess people saw it, 권리? You get a paycheck, you get a raise in your paycheck, you go to the store, you come out with fewer things. And yet the White House is still pushing, 그, 어쩐지, if you let us spend more money, it will curb inflation.
PAYNE: Are they too focused on P.R., rather than solutions?
헤매다: 오, 물론.
보기, the problem is, the administration seems dominated by modern monetary theorists, MMT. 아시다시피, that theory says it doesn’t — printing more currency, printing more money doesn’t matter. We can run up as big a debt as we want, and there won’t be any adverse consequences to it.
And that’s simply baloney. You can’t do that in your family. You can’t do that in your business. You sure as heck can’t do it as a country. And you can’t do it at the United States of America, where we’re the reserve currency of the world.
You cannot inflate the dollar without bad consequences. And that’s what we have been doing. 생각 해봐. The debt in 2008 was like $ 10 일조. 오늘, 그것은 29, I think it is, close to $ 29 일조. In a relatively short period of time, we have gone way up on the debt limit.
과, 그런데, 적어도 50 우리. cities are now doing universal basic income, a lot of them using the excess COVID funds to fund that. And just essentially, it’s free money. You give people money without any sort of demands that they even look for work. 그리고 그들은 말한다, 어쩐지, that would cure our ails.
Here’s what I’m concerned about, 그러나, because the White House is making it pretty clear they are going to go after corporate America. They’re blaming them for all of this. They’re saying they’re gouging, they’re using, they’re extorting. 내말은, they have used some pretty harsh and ugly language about business and capitalism.
Where are you — where does that path take us?
헤매다: 잘, I’m not certain it takes him in a very good political way. 내말은, 확실한, that might affect — that might appeal to sort of the hard left of the Democratic Party that distrusts free enterprise.
But most people live in the real economy. They work for businesses where they’re seeing firsthand the difficulty in dealing with prices that are rising, and wages that are not moving up as fast. And they don’t blame it on the business that they work at or even the people from whom they buy goods and services.
They blame it for a bigger, more underlying cause, 그것은, 다시, the government is spending money it doesn’t have, driving up demand, and we have too much money chasing too few goods, because the value of the dollar is being — is being diminished. The inflation is eating away at the purchasing power of the dollar.
And people on some instinctive level get that. So if he’s going to go out there, as I think they will, and blame companies for — food companies for raising prices, the people who work in those companies know their companies are trying to do everything they possibly can to keep the price as low as possible in order to get market share.
But they’re not able to do it, when everything, all of the inputs are costing them more.
헤매다: 그래서, 어느 정도, people get how the economy works. And they don’t, 나는 생각한다, generally fall for the kind of baloney of the administration appears ready to offer.
PAYNE: 예, we get manufacturing data on Friday. And the number one problem for the manufacturers out there was raw materials, even more than labor costs.
I got 30 초, 칼. Where do we go from here? 내말은, it looks like the Democrats are heading toward a — 인용문, unquote — “shellacking.” Could that also create a pivot?
헤매다: 그것은 할 수 있었다.
It could present — it depends on how the administration reacts to it. If they lose, do they do what Bill Clinton did and adjust to the new reality? Or do they do what Barack Obama did, and that is dig in the heels and go into permanent warfare with the Congress?
We will see what happens.
헤매다: The Republicans and Democrats in the ’90s were able to achieve great things by bipartisan cooperation, including welfare reform, but I’m not certain this president is inclined to cut deals.
PAYNE: 예, I agree with you 100 퍼센트.
칼, great seeing you. Appreciate it. 감사.
헤매다: 감사합니다, Charles.
PAYNE: So is there a way states can provide immediate relief from inflation?
One lawmaker says, 예, by wiping out something all consumers pay each and every day. He will explain.
And is it time to hit Russia with sanctions before they invade Ukraine, not after? 지금까지, President Joe Biden not saying that. Why the top Senate Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee is.
Jim Risch is with us next.
PAYNE: Microsoft shares dropping around 4 percent in after-hours trading, this despite the company beating on the top and bottom lines, $ 50 billion in a quarter for the first time ever.
They’re saying it was good, but some are saying it wasn’t great.
We will be right back.
PAYNE: With price tags climbing, my next guest says it’s time to get cutting taxes, a top Republican in New York state’s Assembly there.
And others are actually in his party — in his party want to wipe out the sales tax on a range of everyday items to give consumers a break.
Republican Will Barclay is with us now, New York state Assembly minority leader.
할 것이다, thanks for joining us.
I love the idea. I think everyone watching loves the idea. So where’s the – – where’s the opposition from this coming from?
STATE REP. WILLIAM BARCLAY (R-NY): 잘, 당연히, it’s from the Democratic majorities and probably from the governor.
We hear a lot about, what can a state do about inflation? And here’s a very easy solution that’s going to give money right back in the pockets of hard worker — hardworking New Yorkers.
My office came up with a stat. We found out that, because of this inflation, it’s costing a family of four about $ 500 more a month. And if you annualize that, 이것의 $ 6,000. And that’s something that, if we can provide a break to those families to help them with the hard times are having with this increase in inflation, it seems like the right thing to do.
그러나, 운수 나쁘게, the majority is — they’re not for any kind of tax break, even though, 아시다시피, a sales tax is so aggressive.
And here’s what’s really amazing is, when we had the — when COVID, the most recent real massive economic crisis came out, around the world, one thing every country did was lower taxes. Almost every country universally lowered their taxes on business. They lowered taxes on consumers. They knew that that would keep the wheels of commerce going as they had to shut things down.
그래서, to me, this doesn’t seem like an economic question. It feels more like a political question, an ideological situation. Those folks you work with across the aisle in New York State, they know — they can — they know history. They know math.
Isn’t this more just about some form of ideology to punish, as opposed to economics?
BARCLAY: I think so.
내말은, it is incredible. Even during this so-called budgetary broom that we’re facing in New York state, 다만, 예를 들면, 작년에 — tax receipts last year or the year before were $ 13 billion more. But my colleagues, particularly the socialists that we have in our House, they want to raise taxes even more.
But my argument to them is this. It’s one thing to argue about income taxes, maybe other some form of taxation, but sales tax hurts the middle- to lower-middle-class people the most. Isn’t that the people they say they want to defend? It doesn’t seem so in this case.
So we’re going to keep hammering this issue. I’m optimistic that, the more we hammer it, we can get political support. And Election Day is coming up in November, 과, 바라건대, the voters remember.
PAYNE: How much would you, ideally, if you could, would you want to see the sales taxes lowered?
BARCLAY: 그래서, we’re suggesting we do it on a whole host of products, gasoline, home products, for takeout food.
And it’s going to cost about $ 2.6 십억. 잘, you say cost. 이것의 $ 2.6 십억. And then we say we suspend it for two years. It’d be about a little over $ 5 십억.
PAYNE: 물론이야, 그, 다시, gets us back to the idea — and you brought up the term cost.
If this money is allowed and people…
PAYNE: People are allowed to keep this money, and they go out and spend it, it will work its way into the economy, actually fueling — velocity of money is dead. It’s gone.
We have printed up trillions of dollars in this country. We have borrowed more trillions. And for some reason, the more money we pile up, the less it circulates into society.
Wouldn’t lower taxes help with that velocity of money that’s completely vanished? 전에, if I touched the dollar, the business across the street touched the dollar, the hot dog vendor touched the same dollar, the guy selling blue jeans on a corner touched the dollar, the drugstore touched — that same dollar rotated in the community and we all benefited.
Could lower sales tax help that?
And I guess I misspoke. I think I have been hanging out in Albany too long when I said cost.
BARCLAY: It really should be cut.
So it is a tax cut. 과, 명백하게, we know the effect that tax cuts have. They’re a boon for the economy. And we have seen, 뉴욕에서, which is the highest-tax state probably in the nation, people are leaving with their feet. We have lost 300,000 people in New York since this pandemic began.
BARCLAY: And there’s a lot of reasons for it, 그러나, Mariska Hargitay는 영화 'Law and Order' 촬영장에서 볼 수 있습니다., our high cost of living here in New York is a big part of that.
PAYNE: 예, the notion that the government, when they cut taxes are — it costs them money, 아니, it’s my money to begin with.
BARCLAY: Good point, 물론.
PAYNE: Assemblyman, good luck with this, because it’s an uphill battle, 지금은. I do think the tide is turning, 그러나.
BARCLAY: 나는 희망한다.
PAYNE: 괜찮아, 여러분, to the showdown over Russia. The White House says all allies are in lockstep, but how can they be, with Germany falling way behind?
We’re going to hear what the State Department has to say now.
또한, is it time to hit Russia with sanctions right now, not later? Why the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is urging action. He’s here.
PAYNE: President Joe Biden saying again today the United States and its European allies are on the same page in this showdown with Russia. But are these statements of unity holding true?
Benjamin Hall is at the State Department with the very latest — Benjamin.
BENJAMIN HALL, 폭스 뉴스 기자: 예. 잘, 안녕하세요, Charles.
The State Department briefing just finished, 과, 다시, Ned Price forced to deny that there was any daylight between the U.S. and NATO allies when it came to this Russian aggression.
그렇지만, there are clear signs that there are cracks appearing. 예를 들면, as various countries, 미국을 비롯한, continue to send weapons to Ukraine, the German government refuses to do so. 사실로, it has banned British supply planes from flying over Germany. It has forbidden the Baltic states from sending artillery that Germany sold to them.
Ned Price today, 그러나, reiterating that there would be a united response to any invasion.
(비디오 클립 시작)
NED PRICE, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: This is not the kind of action that can be tolerated in the 21st century. These are the kinds of actions that we sought to relegate to the dustbin of history after the Second World War.
And if Vladimir Putin thinks that he — renewed aggression won’t be met with severe, swift, united response, he would be wrong.
(비디오 클립 종료)
HALL: 그 동안에, both the European Union and Ukraine continue to say the U.S. drawdown of its embassy is premature.
President Zelensky went on television today saying there was no sign of an imminent invasion. And the European Union foreign policy chief said you have to stay calm and avoid a nervous breakdown.
과, 같이 140 Russian warships leave their home port in the Baltics for so- called exercises, President Macron of France has also said he now believes it’s the European Union that should take the lead in negotiating, rather than NATO.
사실로, [object Window], France is hosting delegations from both Russia and Ukraine for talks in Paris. 지금, the State Department is also rejecting calls to impose economic sanctions on Russia now, saying that to do so would diminish the U.S.’ ability to dissuade the country from engaging in further escalation. That is despite calls for the U.S. 그렇게 하기 위해.
And in further cracks, just today, the president of Croatia said he would draw all his troops out of Poland, his NATO troops, if the Ukrainian-Russia crisis escalated. That is a big statement for a NATO leader to say, 효과적으로, we want no part of it — Charles.
PAYNE: Benjamin, 매우 감사합니다.
President Biden saying he may put direct sanctions on Russia’s Vladimir Putin if he invades Ukraine, but should some kind of sanctions be happening right now?
To Republican Senator Jim Risch, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
평의원, thanks for joining us.
What actions, if you could — if you were in charge of this, and you could get it done now, what sort of sanctions would you apply at this moment?
이것의. JAMES RISCH (R-ID): 잘, I’d start first with Nord Stream 2 즉시.
We have tried to do that. The entire Congress was in favor of doing that until Biden convinced his party that they shouldn’t and backed him off of that. And we had a vote on that last week. And we — the Republicans were united. We even picked up some Democrats. That’s something that should be done.
I listened to you prior story about the European — about our European NATO allies. 보기, they’re independent countries. And they have a different view. But the vast majority of them are very much in tune with us. To say that it’s absolute, 물론이야, isn’t true. You Have pointed out the problems with Germany. Germany’s been the weak sister lately, particularly starting with Nord Stream 2.
I think that’s a follow-the-money problem. 그러나, 보기, 그만큼 — Putin has got to understand this isn’t 2014. This isn’t going to be the same as in Crimea. 만약 그가 — if he moves the way he’s talking about, there are going to be very, very serious consequences.
And my Democrat friends are on board if and when it takes place. I’m saying we should move ahead of time. We have finally convinced them to start sending arms to the Ukrainians. They’re doing that. 그만큼 — 명백하게, the Ukrainians are no match for the Russians on the battlefield because of the technological difference.
RISCH: But they can make it very expensive for them, casualty-wise, with the right kind of weaponry.
We’re getting some of that to them now, the Javelin anti-tank weapons.
RISCH: And some other classified material is going there.
PAYNE: 잘, 과, 평의원, to that point, just maybe two hours ago, Boris Johnson saying that Putin would face — 인용문 — “ferocious Ukrainian resistance, and many Russian mothers’ sons will not be coming home.”
다시, 그러나, the big question for the audience, our audience, right now is, do we ever get lured into this militarily? Will any American mothers have to worry about this?
RISCH: 예, I really don’t think so.
이 — the Ukraine is not a member of NATO. Putin has said all along that he doesn’t recognize it as an independent country. He’s bound and determined to put the USSR back together, if he can. Having said that, if they keep it within the Ukraine, there’s going to be lots of consequences.
But it isn’t going to include sending U.S. troops in there. The American people are not — are not there.
RISCH: And we don’t need to be there.
We have some consequences. If indeed he goes in, there’s going to be a real push to enact the SWIFT sanctions on him. That’s complicated. There’s a little bit of pain for us involved in that. But it would bring Russia to its knees very, very quickly.
나는, for one, am going to be pushing for that. I know some of our European allies, 다시, have indicated they’re not too red hot out about doing that.
RISCH: But that needs to be done if there’s an invasion.
PAYNE: I think the SWIFT banking system — 물론이야, any time we get these integrated economic relationships, whether it’s banking, oil or heating, 가스, it gets a lot more complicated.
Senator Risch, 매우 감사합니다. And we will be watching your progress.
그래서, is China preparing an invasion of its own? Why House Foreign Affairs Ranking Member Mike McCaul says it may make a move on Taiwan sooner than anybody thinks. He joins us here tomorrow at 4:00 오후. Eastern time.
그 동안에, FOX News getting exclusive footage of large numbers of adult migrants being released and transported in the United States, this as Border Patrol data shows border encounters are still increasing.
그래서, where does this crisis go from here? We will ask National Border Patrol Council president Brandon Judd next.
PAYNE: We have some breaking news.
The body of slain NYPD Officer Wilbert Mora being transported from a New York hospital to what we believe is the medical examiner’s office. He passed away today from gunshot wounds he suffered Friday night responding to a domestic violence call.
FOX News’ Alexis McAdams has the details — 알렉시스.
ALEXIS MCADAMS, 폭스 뉴스 기자: 안녕하세요, Charles.
예, a very sad update here, very tragic. We have been telling you that this second officer had been in very critical condition. He had been at a hospital for a couple of days. And sources had been telling us with the NYPD that he had at least one bullet that was lodged in his brain. Now we can tell you that officer has, sadly, 돌아가 셨다.
Let’s get to this new video that I can show you right here on your screen. As you can see next to me, you can see some of those ambulances there at NYU. That is where they were taking the body of fallen Officer Wilbert Mora. They were moving that to the morgue, 수사관에 따르면.
지금, the 27-year-old NYPD cop was shot and killed on Friday in Harlem. Mora spent days in the hospital fighting for his life. His partner, 22-year-old NYPD Officer Jason Rivera, 죽었다. The rookie officer passed away on Friday.
지금, the pair was responding to a domestic call when they walked inside. And investigators telling FOX News it was just an ambush. Tributes had been rolling in. Let’s get to this tweet from the NYPD commissioner announcing earlier this tragic news on Twitter.
그녀가 말했다, 일부: “Wilbert is three times a hero, for choosing a life of service, for sacrificing his life to protect others, for giving life even a death through organ donation.” She says: “Our heads are bowed and our hearts are very heavy.”
We can tell you that that alleged gunman was on probation at the time of the shooting. And we are still learning more about funeral plans for both officers. Officer Rivera will be laid to rest on Friday here in New York City — Charles.
PAYNE: 알렉시스, 매우 감사합니다.
Now to the Southern border, CBP releasing the number of migrant encounters in December, and it’s higher than the past three Decembers combined, this as we’re getting an exclusive look at a mass release of adult migrants into the United States.
FOX News correspondent Bill Melugin is in Brownsville, 텍사스, with more — 계산서.
BILL MELUGIN, 폭스 뉴스 기자: 예, Charles, good afternoon to you.
We are in front of a parking garage in the city of Brownsville, where we have been watching over and over as the federal government has just been mass-releasing single adult male illegal immigrants from their custody. Take a look at this video we shot here from this exact spot.
What you’re looking at are federally contracted buses dropping off dozens of these migrants at this small little office at this parking garage. What you’re going to notice is, these are all single adults, almost all of whom are grown men. There are no children and no family units here.
And this is surprising to us, because single adults are supposed to be expelled from the country via Title 42. So we were watching as these migrants shuffled into this building, this small unmarked office, went inside. There were black tarps set up around the area, so the public can’t really see inside.
그때, lo and behold, we start seeing taxicabs pulling up to this small office. And we see these migrants coming out of the building and getting into the taxicabs. And then the taxicabs drive away.
잘, we followed those taxicabs just to see where they were going. And they ended up heading to the airport in Harlingen about 20 ...에 30 minutes away from where we are.
그래서, we watched as these taxicabs drop the migrants off,. And they were going into get on flights to go around the country. We talked to a couple of them. Two of them said they were going to Miami and Atlanta and Houston and they had just crossed illegally after paying a cartel $ 2,000.
Back out here live, the city of Brownsville confirmed to me they are working with the federal government in that little office back there to help facilitate travel needs for these migrants after they are released into the public.
I talked to CBP, 물었다, why are single adults being released? CBP told me they have nothing to do with this. I talked to a source in ICE. That source told me ICE is the agency releasing all these migrants back here.
Very interesting, considering that is the agency tasked with removing migrants from the country.
We will send it back to you.
PAYNE: It is a very interesting twist, 확실히.
계산서, 매우 감사합니다.
I want to get right to my nexus in all of this, the National Border Patrol Council president, 브랜든 저드.
Brandon, we have had this conversation now for so long, you and I. But this twist that Bill referred to, single adult grown men, supposed to be expelled back, 대신, being put on — put into taxis, onto planes and dispersed around the country. How do you explain that?
BRANDON JUDD, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL BORDER PATROL COUNCIL: You can’t explain it.
But that’s what — that’s why we know that this crisis isn’t going away. You alluded already that we have already apprehended more people in this month of December than we had the past three Decembers combined.
That is scary to me, because December is normally our slowest month of the year. And when we had — when we apprehend 178,000 사람들, what that showing is that it’s overwhelming all resources, not just CBP’s resources, but ICE’s resources.
So when I take somebody into custody, and I process them, I process them for deportation, I then turn them over to ICE. ICE can either hold them in custody pending that deportation proceeding or they can release them, with the expectation that they’re going to show up for their court proceedings.
But when ICE gets overwhelmed, when ICE doesn’t have the space to hold these people, that’s when they start releasing them and that’s what we start seeing.
But what really upsets me about this is that the administration hides this from everybody. They don’t tell anybody how many people ICE are releasing. They show how many people CBP is releasing, but they don’t show how many people ICE are releasing. And that’s where the hidden number comes in. And that’s where all those hundreds of thousands of people in fiscal year 21, they were released from ICE’s custody, not necessarily CBP’s.
You could see if ICE is overwhelmed and they sent them back, 또는 — but to put them on planes and distribute folks around the country.
Brandon, we got to leave it there. 정말 고맙습니다, my friend.
그 동안에, President Biden’s poll numbers just keeps slipping and slipping and slipping. We have got a Democratic pollster that’s going to tell the president why this is happening — 다음.
PAYNE: This just in, a judge granting a stay in the appeal over the New York mask mandate. Current rules will stay in effect during the legal process, according to the New York attorney general.
그래서, say it ain’t so, 조. A new Harvard Harris poll shows President Biden’s approval rating slipping to 39 퍼센트, this as the White House faces mounting crises on multiple fronts.
Former Clinton pollster Mark Penn is here to weigh in.
표. 내말은, 그냥 — I guess it’s the proverbial snowball that’s become a boulder. What are some of the insights that you’re seeing?
MARK PENN, FORMER CLINTON CAMPAIGN STRATEGIST: 확실한.
I think these numbers are obviously not good. I think they’re summed up probably now in one word, 경제. I think you see most people believe that the economy is bad. Inflation is something that affects everyone. And so I think the biggest problem right now is the inflation.
물론이야, the virus is out of control. And then immigration and crime. So there’s a multitude of issues. But what’s really changed in the last couple of months is how concerned people become about the economy and inflation. And they said fuel prices and food prices. That’s what they’re seeing skyrocketing in their personal lives.
PAYNE: 알 잖아, the irony there, 물론이야, is President Biden was fond of talking about kitchen table items on the campaign trail, and that’s food and gasoline, 주로. Then you start adding school and things like that into there.
This administration seems enamored with the idea that public relations, that being able to talk around this will be the solution. Every press conference, every time the president speaks, it begins with a preamble on how great his he’s been doing.
So they’re not getting the message, are they?
PENN: 잘, that’s the difference between a campaign, where a campaign is just what you say, and being president, when it’s about not only what you say, but what you do.
And I think that we saw a tailspin occur here starting with Afghanistan. I have got 61 percent of the people who think maybe he’s too old. I have got 54 percent that are wondering whether he can handle tough crisis. He’s got a lot of repair work to do, and not a lot of time to do it.
So it’s time for a pivot, not for doubling down and saying it’s all about communications.
PAYNE: 예, 그래서, 그만큼 — before the potential shellacking.
잘, you have been there. You have seen this. What would he do now? If you had his ear, what would be the first thing that you would suggest he does?
PENN: 잘, I have been floating an idea.
내가 말하다, 잘, 보기, you have really got to reach out to the other side. And the best way to reach out to the other side, 내가 말할 것, on this January 6 물건, I would say we’re going to prosecute the people who were violent, and I will pardon the people who were just protesting and weren’t — and really reach out to people and bring the country together.
We have always pardoned people in the past over political issues. And we have brought the country together. That would be a first step, to me. 물론이야, he’s got to do a tougher border, tougher crime, really under — really break apart Build Back Better into bite-sized items that he could really get passed.
He’s got to do all that.
PENN: But he’s got to make a big statement bringing the country together.
PAYNE: 예. 잘, that’s what — that’s — speaking of campaigns, that’s what he campaigned on. 지금까지, no dice.
And we all are rooting for this to get better, because it’s impacting all of us.
표, 매우 감사합니다. 더 많은 시간이 있었으면 좋겠어. As usual, 그러나, your work is amazing, and we appreciate you sharing it with us.
PAYNE: 괜찮아, 여러분, that will do it for here.
Make sure you catch me, 그러나, tomorrow at 2:00 오후. Eastern on FOX Business for “Making Money.” This market is in major turmoil. The Federal Reserve, the printers of money, they meet during my show. I will guide you through it. You have to watch me.
그러나, 먼저, watch “파이브.”
콘텐츠 및 프로그래밍 저작권 2022 폭스 뉴스 네트워크, LLC. 판권 소유. 저작권 2022 VIQ 미디어 전사, Inc. 여기에있는 모든 자료는 미국 저작권법의 보호를받으며 복제 할 수 없습니다., 분산, 전송, 표시, VIQ Media Transcription의 사전 서면 허가 없이 출판 또는 방송, Inc. 상표를 변경하거나 제거 할 수 없습니다., 콘텐츠 사본의 저작권 또는 기타 고지.