Summary
➡ The article discusses the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, highlighting the country’s damaged infrastructure and high civilian casualties. It suggests that Ukraine should remain neutral in NATO, arguing that its potential membership was a trigger for the conflict. The article also criticizes Ukraine’s leadership for corruption and suggests that the country should focus on joining the EU for economic support. Lastly, it discusses the potential for the conflict to escalate into a long-term war if not properly addressed.
➡ The discussion focuses on two main issues: the need for the U.S. to improve its drone warfare and weapon systems, learning from the Ukraine conflict, and the domestic security concerns related to illegal immigration, particularly from China. The U.S. has been investing heavily in Ukraine, but the equipment is being destroyed by cheaper drones, indicating a need for modernization. On the other hand, the U.S. border security is under threat with a significant increase in illegal Chinese immigrants under the Biden administration, raising concerns about potential criminal activities and national security threats.
➡ The text discusses concerns about unidentified individuals in the U.S., the influx of fentanyl-related drugs from China, and a significant increase in human trafficking, particularly affecting women and children. It criticizes the Biden administration for not addressing these issues and suggests solutions such as declaring U.S. borders closed, revisiting the HR2 Secure the Border Act, and implementing mass deportations. The text also highlights the need for better support for victims, particularly those affected by sexual assault and trauma.
➡ The discussion revolves around the need for a shift in U.S. foreign aid, focusing more on humanitarian assistance rather than social agendas. The speaker believes that the Trump administration had a good vision for this change. They also discuss the importance of economic development skills in international development, and the misuse of funds for irrelevant programs. The conversation then shifts to Argentina, where the new libertarian president, Javier Milei, is making significant economic changes. The speaker suggests that the U.S. should pay more attention to South America, particularly Argentina, as potential allies.
➡ Argentina is in a tough economic situation, owing $44 billion to the IMF, and dealing with corruption and money laundering issues. However, there’s hope as the government is working to tackle these problems and attract foreign investment. The country is also dealing with the influence of terrorist organizations and China’s involvement in South America. Despite these challenges, there’s optimism that Argentina can improve, potentially creating more opportunities for U.S. investment.
Transcript
You’ve been up to all sorts of international mischief. You’re just recently back from Argentina as usual. Yes. We’ll talk about Argentina in a minute. Okay. I think the headlines in the last couple of days beg a discussion that touches on an article that you wrote about the Ukraine war. So we know that in the last couple of days, Ukraine has launched long range ATACMS missiles into Russia. We know that they’ve also used the Shadow Storm cruise missile. That’s a Brit weapon. And then in return or in reply, reported this morning, allegedly the Russians used a. It depends on who describes it.
It’s either described as a medium range missile or as an intercontinental ballistic missile. But nonetheless, the Russians have upped their game with their own missile attack on Ukraine. It looks like an escalation to me. Absolutely. And I bring that up because you in Human Events just wrote an article and it’s called How Trump Ends the Ukraine war in 24 hours. Yeah. So, I mean, this seems to be a huge crisis. We could be escalating towards a war that President Trump vowed to get us out of. Yeah. So what’s going on? Tell us your view. It’s we are provoking a nuclear power and this is an unprecedented move by the Biden administration.
We have never before done what we have been doing in Ukraine to very slowly. Well, not so slowly walk us up to being almost in combat ourselves with Russia. I mean, if you go back to 2022, President Biden was saying that if we gave Ukraine tanks to use or F16s to use, that we would escalate to World War III. Well, we’ve done both of those things. And not only that, a lot of people don’t understand, Chris, that they’ve already been using our short range missiles to launch inside of Russian territory, which is also something that President Biden said would start World War 3 and that they would not do.
But in April 2024, they did a major policy reversal. To allow that to happen. We know that this fall, Ukraine did an incursion into Russian territory, also using our armored vehicles, our weapons, those from Germany as well. If you look at the launch of these long range missiles in context of that, you’ll see we’ve been walking up to this escalation for two years now. Let me ask you a question. Go ahead, finish up. I just want to say, but this allowing them to use the atacms, the long range atacms, this is a dangerous new step in this.
And that is because the United States must be involved in programming the launch of these missiles. That is a big deal. It’s a big deal. But I want to just go back to something you said. So Biden says we can’t give him M1 tanks because that would be World War 3. And then he does it. Right? And then he says we can’t give him F16s because that would be World War 3. And then he does it. Right. Was there ever really a big explanation of this policy reversal or was it just, well, they need it? I didn’t hear an explanation, did you? And that’s because a lot of these things have been done in secret, right? You know, sometimes we do things in secret because it’s in our interest.
I think in this case, a great deal of it was done because the American people don’t want this. Right. President Trump was just elected partly under this mandate that he will end this war. Right. So the Biden administration knows that Americans want this, this war ended. And interesting, Chris, you know, Gallup just did a poll on Ukrainians. 52% of them are ready to negotiate. Also. They’re fed up. They’ve paid a very high toll for what’s gone on there. Yes, they have. In your Human Events article on Trump ending the war in 24 hours or quickly, let’s just say in a matter of days.
You walk through some points, some ideas of how he can do that. Why don’t you tell us about that? Yeah. A lot of people have asked me, can he really end the war in 24 hours like he says, you know, give or take a few hours or a day or two? Yeah, I think he can. He has the correct understanding of the problem in Ukraine, what started the war and what will end the war. And we can get into that. Besides that. He has the respect of our adversaries and our allies around the world. This peace through strengthening is a real thing.
It keeps the world stable when the US has strong leadership. But also, Chris, he’s been laying the Groundwork for this, I think, since the beginning of his campaign. And he has done what the establishment here in D.C. either has been unwilling to do or unable to do, like, you know, put our embassy in Jerusalem. Right. That was a huge move. Huge move. And that’s been promised for decades, decades, but nobody would do it. The unprecedented Abraham Accords that I think were genius because they really. They brought stability to the region in a way that was mutually beneficial for Israel and the countries going into agreement with them.
That’s really a financial or economic deal, and it’s increased the economic growth in the Middle east, you know, so, anyway, I could go on and on. I don’t think people even know what the Abraham Accords are. I think that he doesn’t get enough credit for that. He doesn’t. Because people, you know, they hear the term, but they don’t realize what was involved in hammering that out. And the mutually beneficial growth economically between Israel and countries that had been like the uae, they’re like sworn enemies. Right, right. And I think that Saudi Arabia may be on the verge of being.
I think once Trump comes back into office, they may come around and do that as well. I do, too. But he’s done a lot of things. Like, you know, I think around six NATO members were actually paying their share of defense, 2% GDP, and now there’s something like 23 of them. So it’s steadily grown. And it is because he took responsibility for it, stood on the world stage and said that they had to do it. So he embarrassed him. Really. He’s embarrassed them. He said to him, look, we’re tired of carrying the weight for this whole thing.
You guys swore to do something. You’re not upholding your end of the bargain. Right. And people don’t like that. They get very antsy. They get very nervous when someone says, hey, wait a minute, that isn’t what you agreed to. Why aren’t you doing this? Right. And you fast forward to the Ukraine war. We are by far the largest provider of all assistance, you know, in one package, but especially military aid, which is, if you want to get back to how to end this war, yes, first thing is to declare ceasefire and peace negotiations, because that telegraphs to the world what the US Policy.
The US Position is. Nobody has done that except for Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, no world leader. So once he does that, and Russia, actually Putin, the whole time, has made indications that they were willing to negotiate. Zelensky has not. Right. So in order to bring Zelensky to the table, to put him in the reality of his position, I think that Trump has to cut off military aid because like I said, we’re the ones bearing the brunt of it. We’ve given almost $56 billion in military aid. That’s equipment, training, all kinds of different things. Germany, the second largest provider, is at $31 billion.
But this year, they’ve cut their aid in half and they’re wanting Ukraine and Russia to negotiate. So cutting that off will force Zelensky, as I said, to understand the reality of what his position is, and then we move on. There’s got to be a balance of negotiations and terr and financial concessions between both of them. This causes people to go crazy. But it’s not a negotiation unless both sides negotiate and give something up. And normally in any kind of negotiation like this, both sides give something up, both sides get something that they really, really want. There’s a give and take.
Nobody’s entirely thrilled, but nobody’s really disappointed. And so I don’t know where those lines are going to be drawn. I don’t know what the magic number is exactly. But this is what you’re talking about. That’s what I’m talking about. And interestingly enough, the majority of Ukrainian citizens also think there’s got to be a balance of that and are willing to give up some territory. I mean, Russia has got to provide. They have leveled the critical infrastructure in Ukraine. A lot of people don’t understand that. I was in Central Europe last year for about three months writing the book that you mentioned.
And you get the real news over there. They’ve lost. You know, this war has claimed a million people that we know of. So about half of those are Ukrainians. And they have the largest casualties of civilians this summer. So things are not getting better, they’re getting worse. So again, this is what I think the reality of the position is. And last, what I call out in the article, and I say in the article that this last point makes the foreign policy establishment, the visionless foreign policy establishment, you know, wail and gnash their teeth, and that is that Ukraine must take a position of neutrality in NATO.
And here’s the thing. Trump knows that because Trump said back before this war started, Biden is going to start a war because Biden was insisting that Ukraine become a NATO member. So Trump understands that he, in his words, he said that before Biden’s insistence on this, Russia was not going to invade Ukraine. And this is a historical point, right? Since 1991, after the cold War, right? You know more about that than I do. You’re a great historian on these things. But we started giving verbal assurances at the very least to Russia at the time that we weren’t going to continue to expand NATO toward their borders.
Well, we’ve continued to add country after country after country to NATO. And Ukraine is Putin’s red line. He’s been very clear on this for quite a long time. So Ukraine gets put in sort of a position of neutrality. I mean, much like Austria or Switzerland, they can be armed to the teeth and neutral and just nobody comes in or infringes or nobody tries to create an alliance. What is your opinion on Ukraine economically, through the eu? What would their relationship be with the eu? Well, you know, that could be used as a concession also to Ukraine because they’ve started on a path, path towards European Union membership.
And perhaps we could encourage our allies in Europe to speed this path up, bring them into the EU to give them support for the rebuilding of their infrastructure and hopefully take the main pressure of that off the United States taxpayers. Right. And it’s really in Ukraine’s. Not just Ukraine’s interest, but I think it’s in the EU’s interests to develop and to grow with Ukraine as part of that alliance. It’s a natural alliance geographically. But the key thing, like you just mentioned, I think, is the NATO question. And Chris, let me make this clear. Ukraine is not ready for NATO membership.
I have a real heart for the Ukrainian citizens. I’ve been in the refugee center in Hungary, the Ukrainian refugee center. I’ve watched what was going on with them in Central Europe. I think that there are a lot of good people there, but I believe that their leadership is corrupt. A lot of people don’t know that. Zelensky, you know, over the past, just over the past year, has repeatedly fired defense officials, senior defense officials, because of skimming money off of, you know, out of the Department of Defense. Well, it’s always ranked as one of the most corrupt countries in the world.
He’s outlawed political opposition. He’s closed churches, you know, nationalized TV meeting. This is not a democratic country, or it’s not led by a Democratic leader, that is for sure. So they’re not ready for NATO membership, in my opinion. So this Human Events article, how Trump Ends the War, the Ukraine war in 24 hours, folks can find that on Human Events. What I think is interesting about this, this particular article, is that it’s really, at least in my view, it’s a subset or it’s kind of the capstone maybe of a larger policy paper that you’ve written. So Counterpoint Institute puts out policy papers? Yeah, a series of them.
And the one that I’m looking at and that the folks at home can find@Counterpoint Institute.org is a policy paper called Ending the Russia Ukraine War. So I guess this is the larger, detailed version, or kind of the walk up to the most recent opinion piece. It is. It will explain in detail what US Interest actually is in Ukraine and what we need to do. So, yes, I would encourage people who want to understand more, even if you disagree with me. You know, look at. I certainly. And my staff, we’ve researched this to the teeth. You know, like I said, we’ve spent time in Central Europe, so just give it a try.
And we have several other policy papers up right now under Vision 2025. Explain what that is. What’s Vision 2025? We’re laying out what our foreign policy positions should be during the next administration. And we started that before we knew for sure that President Trump was going to be the next administration. Right. One of the things also is we deal with national security. We actually go down to the border and do border investigations, unlike our current administration. So we’ve also laid out the top challenges that the administration will have to address on the border. And there are things, Chris, that are not talked about enough.
We have had probably the largest human trafficking scheme presided over by the Biden Harris administration, you know, in history. We have very serious challenges of terrorist networks being built in the United States coming through our open borders, the fentanyl crisis. So we lay these out. There’s an unprecedented number of Chinese who have come in illegally, who just. You can read it in detail. But there’s a lot of evidence that networks are being built also by the Chinese. So it’s a lot of work. I want to address those kind of in series. So just give me a second to go back.
So we talked about Ukraine war, Trump being able to end that in 24 hours. That was a human event. South Ed, there’s this first paper, this series you talked about ending the Ukraine, Russia war. I think the section titles on this are great. So the first one is within the paper. You’ve got five sections, and I think they’re interesting because each one, we could probably do a show on each topic, really. The first one is if Kamala Harris wins. And she didn’t, by the way. If she wins, though, Ukraine will be another American forever war. Yep, that’s right.
The second section talks about. Can I say something about that? Yeah, sure, sure. Because A lot of people don’t know this. The Harris administration had already laid out a plan. The Biden Harris administration had already laid out a plan for long term war and commitment to this war for Ukraine. Years of commitment. They knew already that there would have to be another counteroffensive next year. This is stuff a lot of people don’t know. So you can find out about that in there. And the next section is Ukraine’s incursion US Weapons escalate nuclear possibilities, which we’ve talked about.
Yeah. Zelensky, Others say US Aid is not enough. I think a lot of people are fed up with foreign leaders lecturing us on how much money we owe them. I think that’s sort of a. Yeah, I’m caught up with that. That’s an instinct of a lot of Americans of being, you know, told that we need to pay for everything. Yes. And, and also on that, Chris, you know, even we had like the Washington Post and other writers saying, well, you know, this $175 billion we’ve appropriated, it’s. We’re only, we’re really only giving Ukraine about 60% of that because a lot of that money stays here in the United States.
Yeah. To make the weapons we’re sending to Ukraine, you know what I’m saying, and to go to the people who are training the Ukraine. So this argument makes no sense. So I pulled that apart too, in an economic way. One of the arguments was, well, it’s building our industry. You know, our industry is getting bigger. I have no problem with building US Industry, but the problem with that is we are our, our weapons, our warfare are not modern. What we need to be doing is investing in modern warfare capabilities such as drone warfare. And I believe we have started to do that in a good way now.
But that’s really a very socialistic argument. Right. Because that money could be rerouted for where US Interests actually lie. It’s national socialism. It’s a fascist idea of government. And that was one of the hardest. I wrote that. It’s one of the hardest to write. It took me like four weeks to research every day of it. But it’s very interesting to tear those arguments apart. Promises, provocation. And Putin, you talked about this briefly about the idea of. There’s a long history that leads up to Putin’s admittedly unlawful, immoral, totally illegal invasion. Illegal invasion, yes. But there’s history to it.
Yes, a lot of history. Which, you know, the Biden administration and even NATO and all these media people were saying that over and over again, unprovoked war. Unprovoked war. Unprovoked invasion. Not true. Illegal, yes. Provoked. Yes. There’s a question there, right? Yeah, yeah, yeah. And then the last segment on this one before we get to the border is drone warfare and weapon systems. What the US Must learn from Ukraine. I know on this one, Lieutenant General Mike Flynn, former Director of DIA and National Security Advisor to President Trump, he found your analysis on this fantastic. I know because I heard him say it.
Yeah. And I forgot that. Thanks for reminding me. He even retweeted that. That’s right. So that goes back to what we were talking about, where US Money should be going, because we have. One thing that we did learn from this war and throwing all our money into it is that our weapons, like I said, are not up to modern warfare standards because we are sending equipment over there to Ukraine that costs millions of dollars that’s being taken out by drones that the Russians have got from Iran or built themselves that are worth about $30,000. So a $30,000, and that’s a high price.
A $30,000 drone knocks out a $20 million piece of equipment. That’s right. The math on that is very tough. Yeah. And Ukrainians, you know, bless them, have actually been making drones in their garages to take out things that our equipment should be able to. But, you know, because other issues also. The Russians are great at electronic warfare. You know so much about that. We are not equipped, after being in Afghanistan and in the desert for so long in a different type of warfare. We have not been equipped for this kind of warfare. So there’s a lot more.
We could talk about that. But that’s where our money and our interests and our investment should be going. So we’ve sent $175 billion over to Ukraine. Let’s shift to a different border that’s much closer that we haven’t sent $175 billion to go fix. Couldn’t even find 5 billion. Yeah. Another policy paper from Counterpoint Institute, this one, number two, talks about top threats at the US Border, China invasion, terrorism, criminals, and trafficking. So this is really a domestic security question, one that I think resonated very strongly with voters just a couple of weeks ago in the election.
Absolutely. This is a topic that really strikes close to home, and it’s got a lot of facets to it. It’s national security, it’s law enforcement, it’s quality of life questions for communities. That’s right. I know there’s a lot to it, but give us an idea of what you were looking at and talking about in this policy paper. Well, and I briefly mentioned this before, but it’s what the administration needs to focus on as priority. And a lot of that comes down to terrorism. Countries who are adversarial against us, who have been coming through our borders and we don’t know who they are.
Right. These people are unvetted. Our friend Rodney Scott, former chief of Border Patrol described it as before, before, you know, Biden put in this catch and release policy that usually border patrol would spend like an hour and a half with people interviewing them, finding out who they were. Because of the mass influx of people coming across the borders. That amount of time went down to like four minutes. There’swe can go on and on and talk about how there’s consequences from that. We don’t know who’s in this country. One of the things that we found out also from ICE is that hundreds of thousands of illegals with criminal histories have been released into the United States.
We don’t know where they are. So you’ll hear arguments about, oh well, you know, we don’t know where these people are. Maybe they left, maybe they’ve been arrested again. Maybe they’re on streets. These are murderers, these are rapists, these are people who are robbers. They’re violent criminals. They’re violent criminals. And I think that’s going to be this is my own interpretation and it’s not too far of a stretch. These are the people that are at the top of Tom Homan’s list. I agree the new president and I think he’s going to do a great job. He’s talked about and the president has talked about very aggressively doing mass large scale deportations.
And I believe that the very top of the list of priorities are the guys that you just finished describing. Absolutely. That group. We’re not worried about the guy who’s we’re worried about him, but he’s not the top of the list. The guy who’s a roofer in Dallas. Okay. He shouldn’t be here. But there’s real criminal gangs that trend. The agua people, the Ms. 13. That’s right. And that’s those are the people that are going to get the focus. I believe and I think you’re they are and Holman has said that and I believe he’s the guy to do it.
I think he can really I think he’ll be critical in getting people out, looking first at people who are criminals connected to terrorism also in some way. And you will see, mark my words, you’re going to See a dramatic decrease in crime. You know, this is something also I debunk in this paper. You remember in the debate between Harris and Trump, Right. She said that crime had gone down, or David Muir or whoever that was to fact check Trump. Here’s what the truth about it is. During the Biden Harris administration, violent crime in the US went up by 41%.
And you can read about it in the paper where this comes from. Under the previous Trump administration, it had gone down by 17%. So we don’t have data directly showing how illegal immigration is connected to this, but, you know, common sense and also research done in Europe has shown that there is a connection. And you’re exactly right. You know, these are the people that should be targeted first. And I believe that Homan would do that. We’ll do that. And of course, this is a problem that Trump is inheriting. That was, in my opinion, manufactured. It was created absolutely by Biden Harris.
Unnecessary. Mayorkas, the various other minions, they set out to do this. They set out deliberately to compel or to create the conditions for this mass migration into the country. They sure did. I mean, it all starts with catch and release, where Border Patrol and even Homeland Security agents were telling me, we’ve told to let these people go unless they’re on the terrorist watch list. Sheriffs were telling me we’ve been told to let the people, you know, right. At the beginning of the Biden administration, we’ve been told to let the people go that are in our jails.
Where are they going? And even the people on the terrorist watch list. Yes. Got through. They got through. Yes. So, I mean, there’s instances of them running around loose and, you know, Homeland Security basically issues a press release saying whoops. And I mean, there’s no consequences for it. Afghanistan. Yeah. Something I know that you’ve written on in this paper and talked about are some really startling numbers about China and the number of Chinese entering the country. I don’t think folks have an idea of the scale or the shift sort of the pre. Biden, Biden, what’s happening with Chinese.
It’s crazy, Chris. When we published this paper, which I believe was October, October of this year, about 160,000 Chinese have come in illegally into the United States. And my understanding is that nobody leaves China without the Communist China, the ccp, knowing about it. Right. So if you compare that with the whole 10 years, and this is just during the Biden administration. 160,000. Yes. Plus more than that. Plus under Biden, under Biden, if you look at the first, excuse me, at the 10 years prior to Biden’s administration, 15,000 in total, Chinese illegal immigrants had come in. So 10 years before 15,000.
Yes. Biden takes office to now at least 160,000. Yeah. Maybe it’s 200,000 by now. Who knows? Right. I’m sure it is, yes. And so that’s. That didn’t happen by accident. It did not. And you know, I read some reports and actually some former FBI officials sent a letter to Congress this year saying we are looking at the patterns of the people coming in illegally. And it looks to us like it’s an organized network. And I don’t doubt that it is, Chris. You know, the Chinese government has like a whole of government approach to the United States and influencing us and taking us down, quite frankly.
And that approach includes hurting U.S. citizens. So the question is, not just my question, but the question of other experts is how many of these Chinese. Let’s just say it’s 1%. Right. Illegally here. Right. How many of them are here to sabotage our water supply? Right. They’re bad actors, our infrastructure. Right. To hurt the American people in some way. It took what, 19 people to kill thousands on nine, 11. Right. So this is a very serious thing. So if you just stick with a number of 160,000. So it would be 1600 people. Yep. So the total population of Chinese, if just 1% were bad guys, illegal.
And I’m talking about illegal immigrants here. Yes. And you say, well, so these are people that are involved in some kind of subversion or sabotage or just disruption. And there’s a bunch of different ways to disrupt things. Yes. That’s 1600 people running around loose. And we really don’t have a handle on who they are, what they’re doing, where they are. We don’t, we don’t know where they are or who they are. I mean, I think Holman’s going to do a lot on this. But I’m trying to point out what the main problems are because there have been networks formed, I believe to be adversarial against the United States and not just me and Chris, if you couple that with the fact that there is an unprecedented amount of fentanyl related drugs that have been pushed through our border.
We know that China sends fentanyl. What’s the word? I can’t think of the word. Derivatives. What’s the word? I’ve lost the word to Mexico. The precursors. Precursors, where the cartels mix those with other drugs that people in the United States take, thinking it’s a Xanax, thinking it’s whatever recreational drug. Don’t take anything that hasn’t come from your pharmacist because people are dying not knowing they’ve taken fentanyl. That most definitely is also part of the strategy of the Chinese. They’re killing Americans in record numbers now because of this fentanyl. And you know, this is the number one killer of people between ages 18 and 45.
That’s our youth group there. Right. You think that’s a mistake? That’s not a mistake on part of the Chinese. It’s strategic. Another thing that’s not a mistake, and this is really disturbing. I’ve covered this in other podcasts, different interviews with people. Tara Rodis is a woman who had firsthand knowledge of child trafficking. But you talk about in your paper that this is the largest human and sex trafficking scheme or operation in history. Yeah. How did you come up with that analysis, that conclusion? Because of the unprecedented numbers flooding through our borders. I believe it’s up to 20 million people.
We do not have data on our borders saying how many of those have been sexually abused in some way. However, we have data further down in South America to show that it’s about at least one in three of women and children and sometimes men coming across. You can read more in the paper, but here’s another fact. The percentage of women dying as they’ve crossed the border on the US Side, I believe it has tripled. It’s in my paper. I believe that number has tripled since Biden took office. More women and young girls are coming. But, Chris, I could give you some more stats and things on that.
But I think what made the greatest impact on me is I go down a couple times a year to the border, you know, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, a little bit in California. And hearing the stories of the people that live there, the US Citizens there, of law enforcement, of border patrol, of medical professionals, of the women, the teenagers, the little girls who have been sexually harmed. And it’s devastating. In fact, I don’t even like to talk about it. I get upset talking to one professional, a guy recently, this year, he was telling me that, and he’s, like I said, a medical professional.
He was telling me that he sees it on a daily basis and that the young girls that are going into our country, we have to realize that they are also going into our schools, they’re in our communities. And his question was, and I think it’s very valid, what is the psychological impact? What is the health impact on our societies through this These women, these young girls, this is not an issue that has even been acknowledged by the Biden administration, by the media. So there’s no help put in place. Right. It’s not just the physical trauma of what they’ve experienced through some kind of sexual attack or assault, but it’s the emotional and mental impact or consequences of that because they’re walking around with that inside them.
Right. I mean, that’s. Yes. And, you know, I had a story from a border patrol agent who tried to rescue an 18 month old who was not able to rescue this little girl from drowning. Tried to. And they found out she had been horrifically raped, you know, in ways I can’t describe here on camera. But that’s where I get choked up. It’s. I watched men telling me these stories, them getting choked up and crying over. It’s a very bad situation. And it wasn’t acknowledged at all by the Biden administration. So this is very hard. They actually talk a big game.
The Biden administration talks a big game about women and children. Yes, they do. Right. They’re supposed to be the big defenders and they understand and they protect and they defend and they’re fighting for women. Yeah. There’s no evidence of that in the stories that you’re talking about. No. In fact, they abandoned these women and these children. They put the processes and the methods in place to encourage them to come in, and it’s a very bad situation. Do they know what they’re subjecting them to? Do you think they have an appreciation of the organization? Yes, I do.
Yes, I do. So they’re willfully baiting them into a situation or process, a criminal enterprise. They’re willfully baiting them into that, destroying their lives. Yeah. What is that? I mean, what does that tell you about the people that are behind this? Mayorkas. And it’s criminal. In my viewpoint, it’s criminal. And then we haven’t even touched on the kids that are basically sold. Yeah. And you’ve done some great reporting on that. That’s a crazy situation. One of the things I like about your papers in both instances is that you just don’t do a listing of, oh my goodness, the world’s coming to an end and we have all these horrible problems.
You offer solutions and recommendations. You did it on the Ukraine, Russia war situation, and you also did it on your border policy paper. You identify all the problems, but then you say, hey, and here’s how you fix it. So talk a little bit about some of the recommendations that you have. Yeah. And I can’t go into minute detail in a policy paper, but the very first thing, and this sounds like duh, you know, but it’s, it’s something the Biden administration didn’t do. The very first thing is to declare to the world that our borders are closed, which I believe the election of reelection of Trump has already done.
I believe that people will start if they have not deporting themselves. Self deportation. Right. Self deportation. It’s very interesting when you apply risks and consequences to something where that people take heed. In other words, you know that if you come through our borders, you’re not going to be let go again with catch and release. You’re going to be arrested. Right. You’re probably, you know, there’s a greatly reduced chance that you’re going to want to come through like you did before when you knew you would, you know, have free money and all this kind of stuff. So that’s one of the very first things.
And we need to revisit things like HR2 secure the border Act. Counterpoint Institute was one of the organizations that pushed that through in the House. It was passed in the House, but not the Senate. Of course, we need another act like that. In fact, Mike Johnson has talked about that being the second act that they work on. Again, what it did was started rebuilding the wall again, put Mexico City policy back in place where people who are coming to claim asylum will go back below the border to wait. That’s part of it. That’s a remain in Mexico provincial.
Yes. I’m sorry. I said Mexico City policy, which is about international abortion and US Funding it. Yes. It’s remain in Mexico policy. Yes. Thank you. So you have solutions which are great. And there’s a lot of people that have spoken on this topic. I know that you’re in an alliance with other organizations that are similarly concerned about these issues. And I think we’re going to see some pretty fast results. Yeah. I mean, and part of it is mass deportations, multi agency. I believe it’s going to cost us some money. But in the long run, we are going to be more secure.
We are going to be safer. We can put America interests back in our focus. I know that Tom Homan, who we both know is going to be the border czar, Governor Noem, who I don’t have any contact with, she’s going to be heading up Homeland Security. Another person, I think, who’s very sharp on these issues and he’s got a tremendous personal background, professional background, is another mutual friend of ours, Derek Maltz. Absolutely. And I Think he would be fantastic. He would. In a senior law enforcement role. I don’t know what title or which agency, however that’s worked out.
There’s people, I’m sure, working on that. But Derek Maltz is another real hero in this, in educating the public and especially about the fentanyl situation and how it’s killing people. And he has a real heart for it, and he’s extremely qualified and experienced. Yeah, I know he’s an ally of yours. Yep. So I’m going to shift. We’ve talked about some great policy stuff, some great ideas. Ukraine war policy papers you’ve developed, and these are on your website@counterpointinstitute.org that is correct. You can find them up there. We also have a paper up there about how to. About foreign aid, because if you knew where US Foreign aid was going, it’s going to make your hair stand on end.
But we need. We can find ways to fix that. We have focused aid on social agendas instead on actual humanitarian assistance. We need to cut staff anyway. Tim Meisberger, who worked under the first Trump administration as director of Governance and democracy, he wrote that paper. I wrote the intro to it. He’s got some great ideas. But. Yeah, you know, may I say one more thing, or. Okay, you’re right. I feel like we’ve given people a lot of sad information today, and my point in doing that is to make people understand what the main challenge is, are.
But we do lay out a vision, and I believe the Trump administration has a very good vision on turning, like, 180 degrees from where we were going. And our main focus, our main three goals, is to bring the US Back on that stage of the global leader with the respect of our allies and our adversaries, which we don’t have the respect of a lot of our allies right now. Second, to put our resources, like we talked about Ukraine back on American interests. First, these are finite resources. We can’t keep printing money and going up in debt.
It doesn’t work long term. And then three, it’s what we were just talking about, closing the borders and beginning mass deportation. So there’s a lot of things under that, but those are the goals. And so you mentioned, we talked about two of these papers. The third paper is on US Foreign aid. I agree with you. I think if the American public knew how many hundreds of millions of dollars or billions of dollars are kind of scattered around the world. Some stuff I’m sure is good, but some stuff is absolute lunacy. You’ve got a PhD from Tulane University in International Development.
You’ve run around all over the world. Africa, Middle East. When we’re spreading money around, do people in the developing world, do they really care about transgender ballroom dancing, or do they want clean water, education, a chance to make a living? What are the choices that they want? Well, I think you said it right there, obviously. Actually, a girl that I know that or used to know that grew up in Kenya, went to the United Nations, I guess, about five or six years ago, to tell the UN that she grew up in a place without roads, without schools, without hospitals.
And so she was trying to tell the UN we not trying. She did. We don’t need your access to abortion. We need a place to take our kids when they’re sick. We need roads to get them there. You know, we need running water so that our kids are healthy. That’s the point. When you actually work within international development, not in one of these organizations like International Planned Parenthood or International Maristo, whatever it is, you don’t ever think about, oh, we gotta bring these people who are, you know, have an AIDS epidemic. We gotta bring them abortion access.
What? No. You’re trying to save people’s lives. You’re trying to teach. What I did was teach skills, economic development skills, and help people around the world to develop businesses, whether very, very small or very, very big. Because once you can do that and make your own income and you hold your own money, there’s so much you can do with that. And women especially need that help because they’ll use that money to better their families, better their children. Research shows, in some areas, better than a male would of the family. So it’s interesting. Yeah, it’s. It’s important.
Wait, I have to tell people why you said transgender ballroom dancing in Peru. It’s a real thing. It’s a real thing. The Biden administration was funding this in Peru. I don’t know how many millions of dollars they spent on transgender ballroom dancing. As though that had. Would have anything. Like you said, people want clean, running water, a medical clinic, a school. I mean, the fundamentals, right, they’re not interested in this kind of fringe, you know, esoteric, boutique gender ideology stuff. But that’s just a drop in the bucket of many programs that they’ve done and that the Obama administration did, pushing this ideology of transgenderism and lgbt, et cetera.
Not protecting people’s lives. Yeah, we should do that, sure. But pushing an ideology into schools. And I have had so many people from Africa, central Europe, all these places come to me and say, can you please help us. Your government is trampling all over our religious liberty, our cultural liberty. Anyway, so. So last time we talked, we were talking about Hungary. You have a book out called Last Warning to the Hungary’s Triumph Over Communism and the Woke Agenda. And you spent a lot of time in Hungary and you wrote a fabulous book. The book has some incredible endorsements.
Tucker Carlson, the late, great Lou Dobbs Journal, Michael Flynn, Congressman Paul Gosar, Kari Lake wrote the foreword to your book. Yep, that’s a pretty cool accomplishment. So we talked about Hungary last time. Now you’ve jumped around to another part of the world. You just came back from Argentina. True. What were you doing in Argentina? Well, I think that the United States needs to pay a lot better attention to what’s going on in South America. And interestingly enough, so does Rubio and Mike Waltz coming in. So I think this bodes well for us because Argentina, they have a libertarian president, Javier Milei.
Javier Mile, who has turned the country’s economy upside down after decades of one form of socialism or the other. And so it’s a lot to kind of present. So let me think where to go with this. My issue is that there’s this one country down there in South America standing for democracy and freedom and private property and economic. They should be a natural ally. They should be our natural ally. And yet we have stood by and watched country after country in South America become more and more engrossed in Communism, Marxism, and be infiltrated and invested in by China, China, Iran, Russia.
So I really like the fact that Rubio, or maybe it was Waltz, is talking about a renewed Monroe Doctrine where the United States is saying, this is our hemisphere. Russia, get out. China, get out. This is our hemisphere. We don’t like you playing in here. And here’s the thing, the Argentinians, they are interested in closer relationships with the U.S. i know that it may not be a perfectly compatible. In some areas of trade, they have beef, we have beef. But there are things that we can work on. So anyway, I went down there, met with their Foreign ministry, met with the Vice President.
Her name is Victoria Vicharuel. I don’t speak Spanish very well, but she’s a really strong fighter on all these issues. I met with one of Javier Mile’s leading economists, Hector Rubini. He has been responsible for a lot of, you know, partly responsible for what’s going on there. And Milei himself is an economist and an academic. Yes. So this is the economist, Economist Hector Roubini. So he’s a certified smart guy. Certified smart. Guy, yes. And so these are various people, sort of either in the Argentine government and sort of the circles of President Milei, his ministries, his advisors.
You mentioned the Vice President. These are the people that you went down and met with. Yes. And Chris, here’s what’s going on. This is why I think we need to be involved. Milei gets into office this last December, I believe it was December, November, December, and he starts doing what he said he would do. He actually slashed, cut out nine agencies. He slashed these secretariats, like 50 of them, slashed 45 undersecretariats, started laying off tens of thousands of people. They call them noki because they are people that only show up around the time that they traditionally make this pasta.
You know, Argentina’s Italian, Spanish. So that’s payday when they show up. They show up for payday and then they go back home. So a lot of people are on the government payroll that are not working. So in the words of a friend of mine there, they were invited to leave. I think that may happen in Washington, D.C. very shortly. I think that’s going to happen. Yes. I think people are going to be invited to leave. That’s just a guess on my part. Yeah, I like that phrase. But what’s happened is he’s got them out of their debt.
Right. Their deficit inflation per month was like 25% a month. It’s gone down to 2.5%. That’s not to say that there’s not problems still. There’s a lot of people that are in poverty between 40 and 50%. It’s going to take a while for the economy to catch up to this. It’s going to hurt, I think, in some ways, but it’s got to be done. This country in the early part of the 1900s was one of the wealthiest countries in the entire world. They’re very European people, very prosperous people. And it’s down now on the very bottom economically.
They owe the IMF $44 billion. Nobody else owes that much. It’s a bad situation. And the poverty of the people. Among the various government officials that you talked to, you mentioned to me that you met with the head of the Criminal Intelligence Division of their Security Ministry. That’s very interesting. Ricardo ferreir, what did Mr. Ferrer have to say to you about what they’re doing? He’s an interesting guy. He’s an interesting character. I think one of the things that was most fascinating to me is he was describing the networks of Chinese money laundering going on in the country.
And I could not sit here and explain it to you because it is so intricate, but it involves millions and millions of dollars that are being money laundered with these Chinese networks. And he is tasked with taking these down, among other networks. It is one of the part, a great big part, I should say, of them trying to squish corruption because Argentina has had great corruption. Squish this and invite more foreign investment into the country. It’s a confidence builder. It is a confidence builder, yes. I think it’s also interesting you’d mentioned that, not with a lot of detail, but that they were also looking at the involvement of Hezbollah and Iranian, either Iranians or Iranian proxies, and they’re up to mischief in South America.
I don’t think most Americans associate Iranian mischief in Hezbollah. And what are they doing running around South America? I know he wasn’t very detailed about that, but the fact that he’s looking at that and he’s a criminal intelligence guy for their security ministry, I think that’s fascinating. It is, and it’s one of the reasons, I’m glad you brought that up. It’s one of the reasons I think that we should be more involved down there because, yes, these terrorist organizations are also building networks and they have a lot of influence in different countries, Venezuela being one of those.
And our friend Joseph Humair, or maybe his says his name in South America humidity. I don’t know how he says it down there, but he’s an expert on this. His writings are very good. He knows a lot, actually. He opened up my eyes to the fact that these organizations were so powerful in South America. So what’s your. I mean, it’s probably unfair to ask the question, but I’ll ask it anyway. What’s your prognosis for Argentina? Is it a straight uphill climb or is there light at the end of the tunnel? Or are there opportunities for America? What’s your kind of read? Having spent some time down there with senior people, this was not, I mean, you met man on the street stuff, but also very senior folks.
What’s the impression you’re left with? I think that there certainly is light at the end of the tunnel for Argentina. Like I said, it’s. It’s hurting a little bit right now, but I believe that Milei can get them there. I believe that Vice President Vishal Ruel can get them there. Interesting. She’s a social conservative, like many of us here in the D.C. conservative movement are. She’s very pro military. So anyway, I do think that their government can get Argentina to a much Much better place, creating more opportunity for US Investment. I am encouraged by the fact.
But if we’re not interested in that, it’s not going to matter. So I am encouraged by the fact that Rubio and Waltz, if they are for sure going to come in and take these positions, which it seems like a State Department secretary and national Security advisor, seems like they are, that they are looking towards South America. I know both of them have been harsh on China’s involvement in South America. So I see. I see hope towards that, because the Argentine government is interested in this. If we have a government that is interested in it, we can explore ways to collaborate.
I also think it’s interesting. I mean, you’re the strategist, you’re the one who pointed this out immediately, that the first, the first foreign leader to visit President Trump upon his reelection was Milei, Javier Milei. So I think that he’s. Was he wearing his leather jacket that I don’t remember? He probably was, but I think that that also speaks volumes. Right. It’s small things. They’re sort of symbolic things, but I think there’s actually meaning and weight box. Absolutely. There are a lot alike. They both say what they think, whether it’s always the best, you know, salt at the moment or not, which I kind of like that, I have to admit.
They say what they think they do what they say they’re going to do. It wasn’t easy to tell people we’re cutting nine agencies, and yet Milei did it. Just the kind of stuff that Trump does, which we discussed at the beginning of your program today. So I think that there are a lot alike, and I really think that Mealy was trying to signal to him that he wants closer relationship with the United States. We cannot allow this country to become absorbed, like the other countries, back into communism, Marxism, no economic rights, you know, we cannot allow it to continue to be overrun with China’s investment and influence, et cetera.
I just don’t think it’s in our best interest. Well, Dr. Hsieh, we’ve talked about a lot of different stuff today. We started off with a discussion of how Trump could end the Ukraine war in 24 hours. And then we moved on to, I guess, a policy paper that more broadly discusses the whole conundrum of the Russia, Ukraine war. We talked about the border and all the challenges down there. It’s multifaceted. It’s not just an unsecured border. And then your trip to Argentina. Do you plan on going back to Argentina sometime? Sure, I do. Don’t know when yet? Don’t have plans, but sure, yes.
So I’m going to give you the last word. Where can people. We’re going to promote your book again. Last warning to the west. Dr. Shea, Bradley Farrell. Where can people follow your work and see what you’re up to? And if they want to have you come and speak to their organization, or if they want to make a donation to Counterpoint Institute, what do they do? How do they follow you? Counterpointinstitute.org, it’s very easy. Go to our website. We’ve got the policy papers here. They’re free. You just download them. If you want to sign up for our newsletter, you can do that.
Only comes out a couple times a month. But we get right to the point on what’s going on and how we can fix it. We have a vision. Also on social media, I’m RSHADC on X and Instagram. And then Counterpoint is Ounterpoint DC on X and ounterpoint Institute on Instagram. Sorry, rsheydc. Yep. Those are my personal ones. Right. But. Yep. So we would love to hear from people. We are very involved with our followers. You know, like I said in the beginning, we actually go to the border to find out what’s going on. We go to the Ukraine refugee center.
We go to Central Europe. We don’t just sit writing these great policy papers in dc, which we do, but we like to get out and find out what the real issues are, what the problems are, what American citizens want as far as our foreign aid, where that’s going, and to teach American citizens what’s actually happening in our foreign policy. Because I found that probably 75% of people have no idea that we’re funding transgender ballroom dancing in Peru, for example. Right, right. So you’re organized. Counterpoint Institute is organized as a not for profit organization. 501C3. That’s right.
So you need donations, isn’t that right? Yes. These trips cost money. You’re right. You need folks who appreciate your work to. I’m sure you have a place on the website to click, of course. And make contributions. Yes, we appreciate that. So I’m going to give you the very last word for the show. What are a topic or a subject or an idea that you’d like to throw out there to our viewing and listening audience that you think needs attention? Well, Chris, I think we’ve really kind of got very detailed on a lot of issues today, so I’ve probably almost run out.
Except that I’m very encouraged because that the Trump administration will be coming in again because I believe that we will be doing, like I said, A 180 on the world stage. Already, nations are signaling the respect for the incoming leader and the incoming administration that goes such a long way in keeping Americans secure overseas and also in the United States. So there’s a lot of different things that I think he will be doing, but I think that people can be very positive about our next four years, at least. That’s very Good to hear. Dr. Shea, Bradley Farrell, Ph.D.
strategist on National Security and Foreign Policy, President of Canterpoint Institute. Thank you for coming in and talking to us today. It’s always an honor. Thank you so much. I’m Chris Farrell on watch.
[tr:tra].
See more of Judicial Watch on their Public Channel and the MPN Judicial Watch channel.
Author
