Read Full Transcript EXPAND
>>> HELLO EVERYONE, WELCOME TO AMANPOUR & COMPANY.
>>> TRUMP AND ZELENSKY STRIKE A DEAL ON MINERALS.
WITH TRUMPS NEW DEMANDS ON EUROPE AND PUBLICLY SIDING WITH PUTIN, BEN WALLACE JOINS ME ON A NEW WORLD ORDER.
>>> UNELECTED BUT IN CHARGE.
I SPEAK TO A CONSERVATIVE LEGAL SCHOLAR ABOUT THE UNPRECEDENTED POWER OF ELON MUSK AS TRUMPS ENFORCER IN CHIEF.
>>> THE COUNTRY IS GETTING A CRESCENT --CRASH COURSE ON HOW TO PURGE THE MILITARY.
>> THEODORE R JOHNSON SAYS THAT THE PRESIDENT FAVORS LOYALTY >>> AMANPOUR & COMPANY IS MADE POSSIBLE BY THE ANDERSON FAMILY ENDOWMENT.
JIM ATWOOD AND LESLIE WILLIAMS, CANDACE KING WHERE, THE SYLVIA A AND SIMON B POINT A PROGRAM ENDOWMENT TO FIGHT ANTI- SEMITISM.
THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF LAYLA AND MICKEY STRAUSS, MARK J/A, C AND J MELVIN, THE PETER G PETERSON FIND AND CHARLES ROSENBLUM.
COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN OUR COMMUNITIES.
BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG, JEFFREY KATZ AND BETH ROGERS PBS STATION FROM VIEWERS LIKE YOU.
THANK YOU.
>>> WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM, EVERYONE.
UKRAINE'S PRESIDENT IS GEARING UP TO VISIT WASHINGTON TO SIGN THAT DEAL WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP OVER RARE EARTH MINERALS AND RECONSTRUCTION.
BUT WITH THE COUNTRY'S VERY SURVIVAL ON THE LINE, WILL THIS AGREEMENT GIVE UKRAINE WHAT IT NEEDS, SECURITY GUARANTEES AGAINST ANOTHER RUSSIAN INVASION.
TRUMP HAS PUBLICLY ALIGNED THE UNITED STATES MORE WITH AMERICA'S ADVERSARY, VLADIMIR PUTIN, THEN WITH ITS ALLIES, UKRAINE AND THE REST OF EUROPE.
SHUTTERS ARE STILL RIPPLING THROUGH THE ALLIANCE.
SINCE MONDAY, THE THIRD ANNIVERSARY OF THE WAR WHEN THE UNITED STATES SIDED WITH RUSSIA, BELARUS AND NORTH KOREA, VOTING AGAINST THE RESOLUTION THAT CONTEMPT -- CONDEMNED RUSSIA'S INVASION.
NETO LEADERS ARE ALREADY RAMPING UP THEIR DEFENSE SPENDING.
HERE IS BRITAIN'S PRIME MINISTER BEFORE HIS OVAL OFFICE MEETING WITH TRUMP TOMORROW.
>> UNLESS UKRAINE IS PROPERLY PROTECTED FROM PUTIN, THEN EUROPE WILL ONLY BECOME MORE UNSTABLE AND THAT WILL HURT US EVEN MORE.
FURTHERMORE, THE GREAT LESSON OF OUR HISTORY IS THAT TYRANTS LIKE PUTIN ONLY RESPOND TO STRENGTH.
TODAY I HAVE ANNOUNCED THE BIGGEST SUSTAINED INCREASE IN DEFENSE SPENDING SINCE THE END OF THE COLD WAR.
>> BEN WALLACE WAS THE UK DEFENSE SECRETARY DURING RUSSIA'S INVASION IN 2022 AND HAS BEEN A STAUNCH SUPPORTER OF UKRAINE.
WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM.
YOU WERE IN THE TORY GOVERNMENT AND THIS IS THE OPPOSITION LABOUR GOVERNMENT NOW IN POWER.
WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THE WHERE WE ACTUALLY ARE RIGHT NOW?
EVERYTHING I JUST LED INTO, NOT SAYING THEY WILL GIVE GUARANTEES TO UKRAINE.
WHERE IS THE SECURITY OF UKRAINE AND EUROPE?
>> FRONT AND CENTER, IT IS WITH EUROPE.
ONE MESSAGE I CAN WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE WITH.
AKIN 2014 EUROPE HAS TO CARRY THE GREATEST SHARE OF ITS RESPONSIBILITY AND RELIABILITIES FOR DEFENDING ITSELF.
WE CANNOT JUST TAKE THE U.S. FOR GRANTED AND IT WAS ABOUT TIME THEY STEPPED UP.
THE 2% TARGET HAPPENED IN 2014.
OBAMA ASKED NICELY AND POLITELY WE COULD SAY J.D.
VANCE ASKED FIRMLY.
AND IT IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
WE'VE SEEN JUST NOW THE PRIME MINISTER ANNOUNCED GREATER DEFENSE SPENDING.
I COULD TAKE ISSUE WITH SOME OF THE CLAIMS BUT FUNDAMENTALLY WE WILL HAVE GROWING DEFENSE SPENDING CONTINUING.
THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR ALL OF US IN EUROPE.
AND WE BETTER LISTEN TO THIS.
IF WE REALLY VALUE NATO WE'VE GOT TO STEP UP .
>> DO YOU BELIEVE EUROPE CAN BE UNIFIED AND IT CAN TAKE ON THIS TASK WHICH HAS BECOME AN X ESSENTIAL TASK FOR EUROPE AND IT COULD HAPPEN OVERNIGHT, IS TRUMP GOING TO GIVE THEM, NONE OF THESE SHIPS OF STATE MOVE LIKE THAT.
>> YOU SAY THAT BUT I HOSTED A CONFERENCE WITH UKRAINE THE DAY AFTER THE INVASION.
I CONVENED THE FOLLOWING WEEK ANOTHER ONE, WE HAD 34.
THEN THE UNITED STATES DECIDED TO CONVENE IT IN BRIMSTONE AND IT CAN HAPPEN QUICKLY.
I THINK THE MESSAGE TO ALL EUROPEAN LEADERS IS, STOP TALKING AND DO IT.
I REALLY --IF YOU WANT TO, CHANGE YOUR CULTURE, CUT SOMETHING ELSE IN PUBLIC SPENDING AS FAR AS IT GOES LIFTING YOUR DEFENSE SPENDING AND INDICATE TO THE RUSSIANS THAT YOU ARE NOT GOING ANYWHERE AND YOU WILL DEFEND UKRAINE AND INVEST IN YOUR DEFENSE CAPABILITY.
THAT IS THE BEST OF ALL, AN PUTIN LOOKS AT US AND NO ACTION AND THINGS WE ARE ALL HOT AIR.
WE CAN DO IT, IF WE WANT TO.
I'M NOT YET SURE WE ARE PREPARED TO PUT OUR MONEY WHERE OUR MOUTH IS, BOTH IN THE UK AND ELSEWHERE.
AND THAT IS THE SIGN WHERE PEOPLE LIKE DONALD TRUMP AND PUTIN SAY, SEE, I TOLD YOU, THEY DON'T CARE.
>> I KNOW YOU HAVE TWEETED THAT THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE THAT WAS ANNOUNCED IS VERY SMALL, LIKE 0.3%, RIGHT?
AND THEY WILL TAKE MONEY FROM THE FOREIGN BUDGET AGAIN.
BUT THE MUNITION OF THE LANDFALL HAS HAPPENED DURING A TORY GOVERNMENT.
A LOT OF ARMY WAS LAID OFF OR DOES NOT EXIST.
>> I WOULD NOT PAINT ONE GOVERNMENT LABOR TOOK IT FROM 3% OF GDP TO 2.2.
WE CAN DISCUSS WHETHER WE SPEND OUR DEFENSE BUDGET ON THE RIGHT THINGS.
>> THIS IS ABOUT SECURITY AND WHAT IS AT STAKE RIGHT NOW.
>> THE MOST IMPORTANT THING FOR RUSSIA IS THAT YOU HAVE ARMED FORCES THAT IS LETHAL.
WE CAN ALL HAVE AN ARMY WITH BAYONETS AND RIFLES BUT YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO DETER YOUR ENEMY BECAUSE YOU CAN INFLICT VIOLENCE ON THEM IN YOUR DEFENSE AND OFFENSE.
AND THAT IS FUNDAMENTALLY WHERE WE SLIGHTLY LOST THE WAY.
WE FOCUSED ON, I USED TO CALL IT TOP TRUMPS, THAT CARD GAME WHERE I'VE GOT MORE THAN YOU IN NUMBERS.
AND THAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE 1991 WITH BOTH LABOR AND CONSERVATIVES.
BUT WE WERE HAMMERING OUT STOCKS, ENABLERS AND ALL THE THINGS YOU NEED IN THE MODERN BATTLEFIELD.
>> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, CANNOT BE CHANGED?
>> IT CAN'T BE CHANGED OVERNIGHT BUT YOU CAN CERTAINLY MAKE SURE THAT YOU START TO INVEST.
THIRD ANNIVERSARY, THE THIRD -- THE SAD THING ABOUT THAT IS THAT UKRAINE HAS SUFFERED AT THE HANDS OF ILLEGAL RUSSIAN INVASION.
AND ON THAT DAY PUTIN SENT TO HIS DEATH, OR STARTED TO, 800,000 OF HIS YOUNG MEN FOR NOTHING MORE THAN EGO.
SO HE DOESN'T ACTUALLY HAVE MUCH OF AN ARMY NOW.
IT WILL TAKE HIM ABOUT TWO YEARS TO REARM AND REINVIGORATE THAT ARMY.
WE HAVE SOME TIME IN THE LAND FORCES TO CONTINUE THE MODERNIZATION THAT I STARTED AS DEFENSE SECRETARY AND CONTRARY TO WHAT THE PRIME MINISTER SAID, THE BIGGEST DEFENSE SINCE THE COLD WAR CAME FROM ME.
AND WE SHOULD ALSO NOT FORGET THAT WE CAN DO AS MUCH AS WE WANT TO WITH UKRAINE.
IN FACT, WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, I DON'T THINK DONALD TRUMP WILL GIVE THEM.
HE HAS BEEN VERY CLEAR.
THE QUESTIONS FOR THE NEGOTIATIONS, THEREFORE, IF THIS NEGOTIATION IS TAKEN OFF THE TABLE, BOOTS ON THE GROUND, POTENTIALLY ANY EIGHT, HE'S GOT NO SKIN IN THE GAME.
WHY IS ANYONE BOTHERING TO ASK HIM TO BE PART OF THE NEGOTIATIONS?
>> HE SAID HE IS GOING TO LEAD THEM AND WILL MAKE A DEAL WITH PUTIN.
THAT IS WHY HE HAS NO SKIN IN THE GAME AND WANTS TO GIVE IT ALL TO EUROPE.
HE IS STILL SAYING THAT WE ARE AMERICA AND WE WILL MAKE THE DEAL WITH PUTIN.
>> BUT YOU NEED ZELENSKY IN THE ROOM.
>> WHAT WOULD YOUR PRIME MINISTER BE ABLE TO SAY WHEN HE MEETS PRESIDENT TRUMP AT THE WHITE HOUSE?
HOW SHOULD HE CONDUCT HIMSELF IN TERMS OF WHAT YOU ARE SAYING?
IF YOU WANT US TO DO IT, BACK AWAY, BUT DO IT.
>> THAT'S RIGHT.
IF YOU WANT US TO DO IT, THE UNITED STATES, IF PRESIDENT ZELENSKY CHOOSES THAT THE PEACE DEAL HE WANTS TO MAKE INVOLVES SOME FORM OF SECURITY GUARANTEES AND YOU ARE NOT APPEARED TO DO IT AND EUROPE IS, THANKS, MR. PRESIDENT, IT'S BEEN GREAT.
BY THE WAY, WE'VE GIVEN MORE TO UKRAINE THAN YOU HAVE.
PRESIDENT TRUMP LOVES TALKING ABOUT FAKE NEWS AND HE TURNS OUT TO BE THE BROADCASTER OF QUITE A LOT OF IT.
>> HE AGAIN SAID THERE HAS BEEN A 350 -- >> THERE HAS BEEN MORE THAN 100 BILLION.
>> HE ALSO KEEPS SAYING EUROPE WILL GET THEIR MONEY BACK FROM UKRAINE.
LET ME JUST PLAY WHAT EMMANUEL MACRON SAID TO TRUMP.
>> EUROPE IS LOANING THE MONEY TO UKRAINE.
THEY GET THEIR MONEY BACK.
>> TO BE FRANK, WE PAID 60%, LIKE THE U.S. LOANS GUARANTEES AND GRANTS, TO BE CLEAR DUE TO >> IF YOU BELIEVE THAT, IT'S OKAY WITH ME.
WHAT IS TO HIS ADVANTAGE BY CONTINUING THIS FALSEHOOD ?
>> I THINK YOU WANT TO SAY TO HIS ELECTORATE, I'VE WON A VICTORY, I'VE GOT OUR MONEY BACK.
HE SHOULD BE ASKING RUSSIA FOR REPARATIONS.
THE PERSON WHO STARTS THE WAR AND INFLICTS THE DAMAGE IS RUSSIA.
IN HISTORY THEY ARE PAID BY THE AGGRESSOR, NOT THE OFFENDER.
>> HE IS ASKING MORE OF UKRAINE THAN AMERICA ASK OF GERMANY AND JAPAN AFTER THE WAR.
>> BASICALLY I THINK HE MAKES IT UP AS HE GOES.
FROM WHAT I CAN TELL.
HE GOT EVEN PUTIN FLATTENED.
ENDED UP PUSHING A SHOPPING TROLLEY AND COMPARING PRICES.
DONALD TRUMP WANTS TO PROVE TO HIS ELECTORATE, I GOT SOMETHING BACK.
THAT IS WHAT THE MINERAL DEAL SEEMS TO BE ABOUT.
THAT'S WHAT ALL THE OTHER CLAIMS ARE.
>> WHAT'S YOUR VIEW OF THAT COME UP BY THE WAY, THE MINERAL DEAL?
>> IT'S EXTORTION.
THE UNITED STATES AND EUROPE GAVE MOST OF THE AID ON CONDITION OF GIFTING.
CERTAINLY THE MILITARY EQUIPMENT.
AND LET'S NOT FORGET, HAVING GIFTED OLD EQUIPMENT, WE REARMED OURSELVES WITH NEW EQUIPMENT.
MILITARIES WORK QUITE HAPPY TO GET THEM OFF OUR BOOKS.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT IT, A LOT OF IT WAS WITH THE PENTAGON AND A LOT OF IT WAS AMERICAN COMPANIES MANUFACTURING FOR SO THEY QUITE RIGHTLY MANUFACTURED AND RECYCLED THAT DOLLAR AND ERUPTED A SIMILAR THING.
I'M NOT SURE HE HAS A RIGHT TO EXTORT ANYTHING, WHO IS, BY THE WAY, DESPERATE AND TRYING TO SURVIVE.
AMERICAN HAS A RECORD APPOINTING ALL OF ITS MONEY BACK.
BRITAIN STOPPED PAYING ITS WAR LOANS IN 2006.
IT WAS A LONG LOAN FOR THE SECOND WORLD WAR, BUT THEY JUST HAVE TO ACCEPT THAT AND UKRAINE WILL HAVE TO BALANCE WHETHER IT GETS SOMETHING.
THE WORRY TODAY IS NO SECURITY GUARANTEES.
WHAT IS ZELENSKY GETTING FOR IT?
>> THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, RIGHT?
LET'S SAY YOU AGREE TO A CEASE- FIRE, OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE, EVERYONE KNOWS THERE HAS TO BE SOME SORT OF TRIP WIRE BETWEEN RUSSIA AND UKRAINE AGAIN.
MOST PEOPLE BELIEVE RUSSIA WILL TRY IT ON AGAIN, IF YOU CAN.
YOU JUST SAID YOU HAVE TO BE TOUGH WITH PUTIN.
I'VE COVERED MANY OF THESE AND EVEN WHEN AMERICAN BOOTS ARE NOT ON THE GROUND THEY ALWAYS PROVIDE TO THEIR ALLIES, AIRPOWER, DEFENSE AND INTELLIGENCE.
AND HE IS NOT PROVIDING ANY OF THOSE, BUT DO YOU THINK HE WILL?
>> HE MAY BE BEHIND THE SCENES TALKING TO THE WORLD OF INTELLIGENCE AND THE WORLD OF PEOPLE THAT CURRENTLY COULD BE DOING SOME OF THOSE THINGS IN SUPPORT.
DATA FEED AND SPACE AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
HE COULD BE DOING THAT IN SECRET AND WE WOULDN'T KNOW.
I WOULDN'T RULE THAT OUT AS A POSSIBILITY BUT HIS STATEMENTS ARE PRETTY CLEAR.
ON THE ONSET OF THE NEGOTIATIONS HE GAVE RUSSIA WHAT THEY WANT.
BUT HE DID SAY, I THINK, TODAY THAT PUTIN MIGHT HAVE TO COMPROMISE.
>> THIS IS WHY I'M SO BEFUDDLED BY ALL OF THIS.
TRUMP PUT OUT A TWEET SAYING HE HAD SPOKEN TO PUTIN, MAYBE HE HAD OR HE HADN'T.
SAYING, WE CAN DO IT THE EASY WAY OR THE HARD WAY.
YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO STOP DOING THIS, OR WHATEVER HE SAID.
TALKING TO PUTIN, SAYING, WE WILL MAKE IT PAINFUL FOR YOU.
THEN HE PIVOTS AND GIVES IT ALL TO PUTIN.
NOW HE SAYS PUTIN WILL HAVE TO MAKE CONCESSIONS.
>> THERE ARE TWO PARTS OF FAKE NEWS THAT GET PADDLED BY, IF I WERE IN IT, IT NEVER WOULD HAVE HAPPENED.
JUST READ TRUMP'S ON ESSAY OF 2021, VERY CLEAR -- >> PUTIN OR TRUMP?
>> PUTIN WROTE IT, IT WAS THE DESTINY ABOUT THE UNIFICATION OF THE PEOPLE OF BRUCE.
AND NATO IS MENTIONED IN ONE PARAGRAPH IN 19 PAGES.
ON THE RECORD, THEY WERE SAYING, THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES OF EXPANSION.
HE INVADED UKRAINE BECAUSE DESTINY AND HIS AMBITION FOR GREATER RUSSIA.
HE SAID IT HIMSELF AND WROTE IT HIMSELF.
WHEN YOU REALIZE THAT, ALL THE SORT OF FAKE NEWS THAT THEY COME OUT WITH, IT'S BECAUSE OF AN INVASION, NATO WAS ABOUT TO DO THESE THINGS, THOSE ARE ALL SORTS OF KREMLIN TALKS AT THIS POINT.
FUNDAMENTALLY PEOPLE SHOULD RECOGNIZE, WE ARE WHERE WE ARE, IT'S BECAUSE PUTIN HAS DECIDED HE WANTS A GREATER PRESSURE.
--RUSSIA.
AND IN 2014 HE INVADED, AND IF YOU REMEMBER THE BUDAPEST, AND EVEN >> THAT WAS SECURITY GUARANTEES FOR UKRAINE HAVING GIVEN UP DID I >> IT IS NOT BECAUSE OF NATO, IT IS A FAKE NEWS LINE.
AND I DEFINITELY HEARD A NUMBER OF AMERICAN COMPANIES TALK ON THIS, THAT THERE WILL BE A PEACE DEAL IN TURKEY AND I REMEMBER AT THAT MEETING, THERE WAS THE TURKISH, RUSSIA AND UKRAINE AND ALLEGEDLY BORIS JOHNSON STEPPED UP AND STOPPED IT.
NOTHING OF THE SORT HAPPENED LIKE THAT.
I WAS THE DEFENSE SECRETARY AT THE TIME.
I TALKED REGULARLY TO MY EURO CRANIA AND COUNTERPARTS.
NEVER HAPPENED.
RUSSIA TRIED TO IMPOSE THE SAME CONDITIONS , BUT THESE ARE THE TALKING POINTS, HEARING IT IN THE KREMLIN AND NOW THE ROSE GARDEN.
>> I MEAN, WHAT WENT THROUGH YOUR MIND WHEN YOU WATCH THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL BOAT?
HAS THERE EVER BEEN SUCH A VOTE WHERE THE UNITED STATES VOTES ALONGSIDE BRESCIA, BELARUS AND OTHER NATIONAL HUNTERS, AND THIS IS WHAT YOUR FORMER HEAD OF INTELLIGENCE SAID ABOUT NEW WORLD ORDER.
>> I THINK WE ARE IN A NEW ERA WHERE BY AND LARGE NATIONAL RELATIONS WILL NOT BE DETERMINED BY RULES AND MULTILATERAL INSTITUTIONS.
THEY WILL BE DETERMINED BY STRONGMEN AND DEALS.
I THINK AT THE END OF 1945, WHERE THREE STRONGMEN AS THEY WERE THEN, THE STRONG COUNTRIES DECIDED THE FATE OF SMALL I THINK THAT IS DONALD TRUMP'S MIND-SET AND CERTAINLY IT IS PUTIN'S MIND-SET.
THAT IS THE WORLD WE ARE GOING INTO AND I DON'T THINK WE ARE GOING BACK TO THE ONE WE HAD BEFORE.
>> THAT WAS BEFORE THE U.N. VOTE ON MONDAY.
HE WAS BEING PRISSY AND RATHER THAN REACTING TO IT.
>> WE ARE IN A NEW ERA.
HOW LONG IT LASTS IS UP FOR GRABS.
FUNDAMENTALLY DONALD TRUMP WON THE ELECTION WITH 30% OF THE TOTAL VOTE.
ABOUT 49% OF THE ELECTORATE.
DONALD TRUMP LIKE ALL OF US ARE HERE TODAY, GONE TOMORROW POLITICIANS.
WHOEVER OCCUPIES THE WHITE HOUSE DOES NOT INDEFINITELY REPRESENT THE UNITED STATES.
WE ALL COME AND GO.
SO IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHEN THAT WILL BE VERY BIG CHALLENGE FOR EUROPE, AND IT MAY NOT BE.
WE HAVE HAD PRESIDENTS BEFORE .
>> THE LAST TIME WAS BEFORE WORLD WAR II.
>> IT IS NOT A NEW CONCEPT.
IT DOES NOT MEAN TO SAY THAT THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS ARE NOW IN FAVOR OF NORTH KOREA AND RUSSIA.
I THINK THEY VOTED IN THE U.N. MY ONE WORRY THAT I THINK IT COULD BE OF A MAJOR DISADVANTAGE IN THE FUTURE, WE ARE MUCH MORE CONNECTED THAN WE WERE, SOCIAL MEDIA, INTERNET.
AND WHAT YOU SAY MATTERS.
BECAUSE IT RIPPLES.
THE PEOPLE THAT WOULD HAVE LAST MORE THAN ANYBODY WOULD BE THE PRESIDENT OF CHINA, PRESIDENT PUTIN, THE SUPREME LEADER OF IRAN, YOU LOOK AT THAT LIST AND GO, OH, LOOK, THE ONLY OTHER COUNTRY ON THAT LIST IS THE UNITED STATES.
EVERY OTHER STATE --COUNTRY HAS ABSTAINED.
AND RIPPLES MATTER.
THE AFGHANISTAN DEAL, DONE BY TRUMP.
WHICH COMPLETELY UNFOLDED ON MY WATCH.
THOSE RIPPLES STILL ARE SPREADING ACROSS THE MIDDLE EAST.
THESE THINGS MATTER WHAT YOU SAY IN PUBLIC AS A SERVING PRESIDENT.
IT WILL BE INTERESTING.
I WOULDN'T LIKE TO BE A CITIZEN OF TAIWAN RIGHT NOW.
>> AND WALLACE, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ALL EYES WERE ON TRUMP'S FULL CABINET MEETING TODAY WHICH INCLUDED THE NON-CABINET, NONGOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE, ELON MUSK.
WHO WAS FIRST TO BE CALLED ON TO SPEAK.
THIS BILLIONAIRE ADDRESS THE CONTROVERSIAL EMAIL HE SENT TO FEDERAL WORKERS TELLING THEM TO EXPLAIN WHAT THEY'VE DONE IN THE PAST FIVE DAYS.
>> LAST WEEK THE IN PRESIDENT ENCOURAGED ME VIA TRUTH SOCIAL AND BY A PHONE CALL TO BE MORE AGGRESSIVE.
I WAS LIKE, OKAY, YES, SIR, MR. PRESIDENT.
THE PRESIDENT IS COMMANDER IN CHIEF AND THEY DO WHAT THE PRESIDENT ASKS.
I SAID, CAN WE SEND OUT AN EMAIL TO EVERYONE SAYING, WHAT DID YOU GET DONE LAST WEEK?
SO WE DID THAT, AND, YOU KNOW WE GOT A PARTIAL RESPONSE.
OUR GOAL IS NOT TO BE CAPRICIOUS OR UNFAIR.
WE WANT TO GIVE PEOPLE EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO SEND AN EMAIL.
>> BUT MANY OF THE SAME CABINET MEMBERS HE WAS ADDRESSING THEIR EMPLOYEES NOT TO RESPOND TO THE EMAIL DEMAND.
ON MONDAY A JUDGE TRIED TO FIGURE OUT WHO EXACTLY IS IN CHARGE OF D.O.G.E.
EXPRESSING CONCERNS ABOUT THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF ITS ACTIONS.
GREG IS A CONSERVATIVE ATTORNEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE SOCIETY OF THE RULE OF LAW.
HE WORKED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND FOR THE THEN SENATOR MARCO RUBIO.
WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE TO START.
LET'S START WITH ELON MUSK.
ELON MUSK'S BUSINESS EMPIRE IS BUILT ON $30 BILLION OF GOVERNMENT FUNDING.
PERSONALITY, UNELECTED AND WITH VERY LITTLE OVERSIGHT, MAKING THE DEMANDS HE IS DOING AND BEING THE STAR OF THIS CABINET MEETING?
>> THERE ARE A LOT OF CONCERNS FROM A CONSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVE AND RULE OF LAW PERSPECTIVE AS YOU HINTED AT IN THE INTRODUCTION.
SEVERAL WEEKS INTO THIS ADMINISTRATION, D.O.G.E.
HAS A STARRING ROLE BUT IT'S STILL UNCLEAR WHAT IT'S DOING, UNDER WHOSE DIRECTION AND UNDER WHAT LEGAL AUTHORITY.
IT IS JUST A PROJECT TO FADEOUT ABUSE.
BUT THE PROBLEM IS THAT IT SEEMS TO PURPORT, ACCORDING TO ELON MUSK AND THE PRESIDENT, TO BE UP TO A MUCH BIGGER PROJECT, RESTRUCTURING THE GOVERNMENT, ELIMINATING AGENCIES AND FEEDING THEM TO THE WOOD SAID.
AND IF THAT IS WHAT IT IS DOING, IT RUNS INTO SIGNIFICANT CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEMS.
FIRST, IN OUR COUNTRY, CONGRESS MAKES THE LAWS, CREATES AND ELIMINATES AGENCIES.
AND WHILE SOMEBODY LIKE ME MIGHT LIKE THE IDEA OF REDUCING THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT, THAT ROLE PROPERLY BELONGS TO CONGRESS.
SECONDLY, IF D.O.G.E.
IS WIELDING ALL THIS AUTHORITY DELEGATED BY THE PRESIDENT, IT OUGHT TO BE RUN BY A NOMINATED OFFICIAL WHO IS CONFIRMED WITH THE ADVICE AND CONSENT OF THE SENATE.
BOTH THE LAWMAKING POWER AND POWER OF THE PURSE AND POWER OF APPOINTMENTS AND CONFIRMATIONS ARE KEY CHECKS IN OUR SYSTEM TO PROTECT OUR DEMOCRACY AND LEGITIMACY AND THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF OUR GOVERNMENT.
THOSE THINGS ARE UNDER SIGNIFICANT PRESSURE NOW.
SO EVEN CONSERVATIVES THAT ARE EXCITED ABOUT REDUCING THE SIZE CONCERNED, SHOULD CHALLENGE WHAT D.O.G.E.
IS DOING IN THE COURTS AND CONGRESS SHOULD TALK MEANINGFUL OVERSIGHT.
>> I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ARE NOTICING AND HOW YOU EVALUATE WHAT APPEARS TO BE A CERTAIN PUSHBACK AND IN SOME INSTANCES THEY HAVE HAD AN EAR FULL CONSTITUENTS, COMPLAINING ABOUT ALL SORTS OF D.O.G.E.
ACTIVITIES.
INCLUDING THE DEMAND FOR MOST SENSITIVE GOVERNMENT DATA, SOCIAL SECURITY INFORMATION, AND APPARENTLY 21 EMPLOYEES FROM D.O.G.E.
RESIGNED THIS WEEK SAYING THAT THE ACTIONS INCLUDE "MISHANDLING SENSITIVE DATA AND BREAKING CRITICAL SYSTEMS."
WHERE, IN ALL THE EXPERIENCE YOU HAD ON THE LEGAL SIDE, WATCHING THIS, WHERE DO YOU THINK THIS IS HEADED.
>> IT IS HARD TO KNOW.
THERE ARE SO MANY OPEN QUESTIONS.
I DO THINK IF THE PRESIDENT IS ATTEMPTING TO REMAKE GOVERNMENT THROUGH THIS LARGELY UNACCOUNTABLE EFFORT THERE WILL INCREASINGLY BE PUSHBACK.
THE KINDS OF PRESSURE YOU HEAR BEING APPLIED TO CONGRESSMAN NOW , REPUBLICANS ON THE HILL WHO WANT ANSWERS FOR WHAT D.O.G.E.
IS DOING.
I THINK THAT AMERICANS SHOULD WANT THAT AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR AMERICANS TO DEMAND CREDIBILITY FROM THE GOVERNMENT EVEN IF THEY LIKE THE DIRECTION THE PRESIDENT IS TRYING TO GO IN.
WE WILL BENEFIT FROM A POLITICAL LEADERSHIP THAT IS HELD ACCOUNTABLE AND FOLLOWS THE RULE OF LAW AND CONSTITUTION.
>> LET'S USE THAT DREAM WORK IN THE REST OF THIS CONVERSATION.
THE PRESIDENT, ARTICLE TWO OF YOUR CONSTITUTION REQUIRES A WAS HATEFULLY BE EXECUTED."
THIS PRESIDENT TRUMP RECENTLY POSTED, HE SAID, HE WHO SAVES HIS COUNTRY DOES NOT VIOLATE ANY LAW.
SO WHERE DOES THAT GO AND WHAT PARAMETERS ARE THERE TO MAKE SURE HE FAITHFULLY EXECUTES THE LAWS OF THE COUNTRY?
>> SOME PEOPLE LIKE TO LAUGH OFF WHEN THE PRESIDENT MAKES COMMENTS LIKE THIS, SAYING IT'S JUST TROLLING AND MEANT TO HAVE FUN.
NO, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT AND CONCERNING.
THE PRESIDENT HAS, ALL OF THE PRESIDENT HAVE SINCE WASHINGTON, THE OBLIGATION TO STEWARD THE PUBLIC TRUST, PROTECT OUR RIGHTS, THE PARTIES, THE LAW AND CONSTITUTION.
THE PRESIDENT IS A CREATURE OF THE CONSTITUTION CREATED UNDER LAW, HE IS NOT A KING OR ABOVE THE LAW.
AND WE NEED TO EXPECT THAT.
TO MY REPUBLICAN FRIENDS WHO ARE FRUSTRATED BY SOME OF THESE LAWSUITS OR NORMS IN INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE RESTRAINING WHAT THE PRESIDENT IS TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH, I SAY TO THEM, YOU MAY HAVE DEEP TRUST IN THE JUDGMENT OF THIS PRESIDENT BUT HE WILL NOT HAVE --BE IN CHARGE FOREVER.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE A STRUCTURE THAT FRAMES THE, AND IT IS ABOUT HAVING GREAT CONFIDENCE IN HIM AND HIS COMMITMENTS TO LIBERTY AND LAW.
BUT THEY KNEW HE WOULDN'T BE PRESIDENT FOREVER, AND THEY BUILT A PRESIDENCY THAT IS CONSTRAINED BY CONGRESS, THE COURTS AND THE LAW.
AND I REALLY BEG AMERICANS IN ANY CLINICAL PERSUASION TO REALLY TO COMMIT TO THAT NOW.
WHAT THE LAWS AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE THAT WE HAVE WAS BILLED AFTER BLOODSHED AND DIFFICULTY AND EARNED CREDIBILITY OVER STRUGGLE AND TIME, AND WE CAN TAKE FOR GRANTED THE LIBERTIES WE HAVE IN THIS COUNTRY.
THE STRUCTURE THAT DETECTS OUR FREEDOM COULD BE EASILY DESTROYED.
IT TOOK GENERATIONS AND CENTURIES TO BUILD UP THE INHERITANCE THAT WE HAVE AND WITH SHORT NIGHT IT IS WE CAN LOSE A GREAT DEAL VERY QUICKLY .
>> THIS IS INTERESTING.
ON THE ONE HAND YOU SAY PRESIDENTS COME AND GO AND PARTIES CHANGE AND CONSTITUTION AND RULE OF LAW AND OTHER BRANCHES MAINTAIN A STEADY SORT OF SHIFT.
MY PREVIOUS GUESTS SAID SOMETHING SIMILAR ABOUT THROWING THE ALLIANCE UP IN THE AIR AND QUESTIONING THE ENTIRE POSTWAR TRANSATLANTIC ALLIANCE .
OKAY, IT IS A LEADER FOR FOUR YEARS AND HOPEFULLY NOT TOO MUCH DAMAGE IS CREATED AND WE CAN GET BACK TO A SOLID TRANSATLANTIC ALLIANCE.
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THE NATION CAN SURVIVE WHAT SOME IN YOUR COUNTRY ARE CALLING TEETERING ON THE VERGE OF A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS.
TESTING THE LIMITS AND BOUNDARIES OF EXECUTIVE POWER, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
AND ELON MUSK, HE SAYS, WHAT IS THE POINT OF HAVING DEMOCRATIC ELECTIONS IF UNELECTED ACTIVIST JUDGES CAN OVERWRITE THE CLEAR WILL OF THE PEOPLE?
>> I SAW THAT.
AND IT'S PART OF A PATTERN NOW OF THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ALLIES TRYING TO RAISE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LEGITIMACY OF FEDERAL COURTS.
I WILL SAY, AND BY THE WAY, THIS COMES ONLY A COUPLE OF YEARS AFTER DEMOCRATS DID A LOT OF DAMAGE TRYING TO RAISE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LEGITIMACY OF A SUPREME COURT THAT WAS REACHING RULINGS IT DIDN'T LIKE, OUR FEDERAL COURTS HAVE LEGITIMACY.
YOU CAN DISAGREE WITH THEIR RULINGS BUT THEY ARE NOT CORRUPT.
IN FACT, IN THEIR COMPETENCE AND INDEPENDENCE, OUR COURTS ARE THE ENEMY OF THE WORLD.
THAT IS INCREDIBLY DAMAGING RHETORIC AND IT OUGHT TO BE RESISTED.
AMERICANS OF ALL STRIPES TO DEMAND THAT POLITICAL ACTORS RESPECT COURT ORDERS.
YOU CAN THINK THAT THEY ARE WRONG AND YOU CAN WORK TO CHANGE THE JUDICIARY OVER TIME, BUT GETTING RID OF OUR COURTS WHICH DO STOP THE PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS AND POLITICAL ACTORS FROM EXCEEDING THEIR AUTHORITY, THAT WOULD BE A GRAVE MISTAKE.
BACK TO YOUR ORIGINAL QUESTION OF, CAN WE SURVIVE, I DON'T KNOW.
WE OUGHT TO ASSUME THAT OUR LIBERTY AND OUR FREEDOMS ARE FRAGILE.
AND IF WE MAKE ANY ERROR IT SHOULD BE IN FIGHTING TOO HARD FOR THEM.
AND BEING TOO WORRIED ABOUT THE DAMAGE THAT COULD BE DONE.
CONSERVATIVES ESPECIALLY SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT INSTITUTIONS CAN BE DESTROYED, WORN DOWN OVER TIME.
RONALD REAGAN USED TO SAY THAT FREEDOM IS JUST ONE GENERATION AWAY FROM EXTINCTION.
WE SHOULD BE CONCERNED.
WE SHOULD NOT BE ASHAMED OR HESITANT TO BE TOO CONCERNED ABOUT REAL THREATS TO OUR LEGAL SYSTEM AND CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER.
>> DO YOU THINK, AS I SAY, THERE IS SOME PUSHBACK AND PEOPLE ARE FEELING IT IN THEIR CONSTITUENCIES.
A NEW CNN POLL SAYS, 52% SAY DONALD TRUMP HAS OVERSTEPPED THE POWER OF PRESIDENCY.
AT WHAT POINT DO YOU THINK THAT REPUBLICANS WILL ALSO JOIN WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT .
I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT RESISTANCE, I'M TALKING ABOUT A DEFENSE OF THE STRUCTURES OF AMERICA'S DEMOCRACY.
>> IT REALLY NEEDS TO COME FROM THE PEOPLE.
IN MY ORGANIZATION, AND THE SOCIETY OF THE RULE OF LAW, AN ORGANIZATION MADE UP OF MOSTLY CONSERVATIVE LAWYERS WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THESE THINGS, WE ARE TRYING TO BRING THIS MESSAGE TO THE PEOPLE.
INCLUDING TRUMP SUPPORTERS WHO WANT THE BEST FOR THIS COUNTRY AND THIS ADMINISTRATION.
WE HAVE TO TREAT THE RULE OF LAW AND CONSTITUTION AS FOUNDATIONAL, A KEY TREASURED INHERITANCE OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
EVEN IF IT SEEMS POLITICALLY UNCOMFORTABLE FOR OUR SIDE AT THE MOMENT.
THIS IS A BIPARTISAN PROBLEM WITH AMERICANS IN RECENT DECADES IN REALLY PRIORITIZING THEIR SHORT-TERM WINS IN THESE POLITICAL TEAMS OVER THESE BEDROCK PRINCIPLES.
>> GOT ONE MINUTE LEFT.
I'VE COVERED THE U.S. MILITARY ALL MY CAREER JUST ABOUT AND IT THE PURGES AT THE PENTAGON.
SO, IS IT LEGAL, AND CERTAINLY PEOPLE THAT PETE HEGSETH HAS QUESTION IN PUBLIC, CEDRIC BROWN, IN HIS PROMOTIONS, WAS IT THE COLOR OF HIS SKIN?
AND NOW TWO OR THREE WOMEN IN THE BLACK CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEF OF STAFF, IS THAT LEGAL?
>> IT WILL DEPEND ON THE CONTEXT, THERE ARE A LOT OF QUESTIONS WITH A LOT OF DIFFERENT INDIVIDUALS.
IT IS ENTIRELY APPROPRIATE, ABOUT HOW MUCH AUTHORITY THE PRESIDENT SHOULD HAVE OVER THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH AND THERE ARE LEGITIMATE ARGUMENTS FOR THE PRESIDENT TO EXERT MORE.
WHAT THE PRESIDENT DOESN'T HAVE IS THE RIGHT TO A MILITARY OR THE LAWYERS WHO JUST DO HIS WILL.
HE IS ENTITLED TO PEOPLE WHO THEY SERVE THE COUNTRY FIRST AND TAKE AN OATH TO THE CONSTITUTION, NOT TO HIM.
I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE PRESIDENT GETTING RID OF PROFESSIONALS WHO TAKE THEIR CHARGES SERIOUSLY AND REPLACING THEM WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE PRIMARILY DISTINGUISHED BY SERVICE AND FLATTERY TO THE PRESIDENT.
OUR FOUNDERS VERY MUCH DID NOT WANT THAT AND WE SHOULD RESIST THAT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR GIVING IT TO US FROM A CONSERVATIVE PERSPECTIVE.
AS WE JUST DISCUSSED, THE PENTAGON IS STILL REELING FROM THE RECENT FIRINGS OF ITS TOP MILITARY LEADERS, INCLUDING THE LEADER OF THE NAVY ADMIRAL.
THEODORE R JOHNSON, A RETIRED NAVAL OFFICER SAID THIS WAS A QUOTE SHORTLY A POLITICAL MOVE.
TARGETING THOSE WHO SAY PORT SUPPORT DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION.
HE TALKS TO MICHELLE MARTIN NOW ABOUT THE POTENTIAL IMPACT.
>> THANK YOU FOR TALKING WITH US ONCE AGAIN.
>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.
>> YOU'RE A COMMANDER IN THE NAVY, WHITE HOUSE FELLOW.
YOU WRITTEN BOOKS AND MANY ARTICLES AND SO FORTH.
WHAT MANY PEOPLE MAY NOT KNOW IS THAT YOU WORK A SPEECHWRITER FOR THE CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEF OF STAFF.
FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T KNOW WHAT THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF TO, WHAT DO THEY DO AND WHY DO THEY MATTER?
>> THE CHAIRMAN IS ESSENTIALLY THE HIGHEST RANKING MILITARY OFFICER IN THE COUNTRY AND IS THE PRESIDENT MILITARY ADVISER FOR ALL THINGS RELATED TO THE MILITARY.
THE JOINT CHIEFS ARE MADE UP OF EACH OF THE TOP ADMIRALS AND GENERALS IN THE AIR FORCE, NAVY, ARMY AND MARINES.
AND I THINK THE NATIONAL GUARD HAS A SEAT NOW, THE SPACE FORCE.
THESE JOINT CHIEFS ARE RESPONSIBLE TO MAN AND EQUIP THE FORCES.
BUILDING SHIPS, TRAINING SAILORS, MARINES, SOLDIERS, ET CETERA AND HE ADVISES THE PRESIDENT ON THE EMPLOYMENT OF THAT FORCE OPERATIONALLY AND ADMINISTRATIVELY.
THE >> THEY FIRED THE JOINT CHIEF, HAD MORE THAN FOUR DECADES OF SERVICE.
HE HAS FIRED THE FIRST WOMAN TO LEAVE THE NAVY IN NAVAL OPERATIONS.
AS A PERSON WHO HAS BEEN SO CLOSE TO THOSE POSITIONS, WHAT WAS YOUR REACTION WHEN YOU HEARD THIS?
>> IT IS UNCONVENTIONAL TO SAY THE LEAST.
CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS, THESE ARE NOT POLITICAL APPOINTEES, IN TERMS OF WORKING FOR ONE PARTY OR ANOTHER, THEY SWEAR AN OATH TO THE CONSTITUTION AND THEY ARE USED TO SERVING ACROSS THE ADMINISTRATION'S MONDAY -- PARTY.
SO IT IS EXPECTED THAT THEY WILL MAKE SENIOR ADVISERS HIS OWN.
THAT IS NOT THE SHOCKING PART.
THE SHOCKING PART IS THE RATE AT WHICH HE IS FIRING FOLKS, THE NUMBER OF FOLKS HE IS FIRING AND THE REASONS THEY ARE BEING FIRED.
IT WAS SAID THAT THE FIRST WOMAN TO LEAD THE NAVY WAS ESSENTIALLY A GENDER-BASED HIRE.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE FOLKS, OF THE 53 OR FOUR STARS THAT HAVE BEEN LET GO IN THE LAST A FEW WEEKS, ONE IS A BLACK MAN, CHAIRMAN BROWN, AND THREE ARE WHITE WOMEN.
IT MAKES YOU WONDER WHEN THE PENTAGON AND WHITE HOUSE ARE PUSHING SUCH HEAVY DEI POLICIES, IT MAKES YOU WONDER WHY FOLKS THAT ARE LET GO AT THE TOP OF THE MILITARY HAPPEN TO BE EITHER PEOPLE OF COLOR OR WOMEN.
>> I DON'T THINK IT MAKES YOU WONDER, I THINK THEY WERE PRETTY CLEAR.
ONE OF THE REASONS THAT PETE HEGSETH HAS BEEN APPOINTED WAS THAT HE ARTICULATED THIS ANTI- DIVERSITY EQUITY AND INCLUSION MESSAGE AND WANTED TO RETURN TO HER WARRIOR ETHOS.
THE QUESTION I AM ASKING, DO THEY HAVE A POINT?
AND WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE OPERATIONALLY?
>> THEY DO NOT HAVE A POINT.
GENERAL BROWN WAS APPOINTED BY TRUMP TO LEAD THE AIR FORCE.
IF HE WAS A DEI HIGHER YESTERDAY OR LAST WEEK, HE WAS A DEI HIGHER FIVE YEARS AGO OR 40 YEARS AGO IN THE MILITARY.
THE COUNTRY IS GETTING A CRASH COURSE ON HOW TO POLITICIZE THE MILITARY.
WHAT TRUMP AND HEGSETH WOULD SUGGEST IS THAT THE POLITICIZATION HAPPEN WHEN ALL THESE DEI MESSAGES FLOODED THE PENTAGON.
THEY ARE TRYING TO ROLL THAT BACK.
IT IS ONE THING MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT TO ITS TRAINING, READING MATERIALS, ET CETERA, TO ACCOUNT FOR DIFFERENCES.
IT IS ANOTHER THING TO LOOK AT A CAREER OF FOUR DECADES OF SERVICE AND SAY YOU WERE NOTHING BUT A DEI HIGHER AND THE MILITARY HAS NO USE FOR YOU.
ANTI-DEI POLICY IS ONE THING BUT OUT RIGHT RACIAL INTOLERANCE IS ANOTHER.
WHAT WE ARE MOSTLY SINGING IS A PRACTICE IN -- PRESIDENT POLITICIZING AND NOT SOME REJECTION , OR NOT A BLAMING OF DEI FOR PUTTING UNQUALIFIED PEOPLE AT THE TOP OF THE MILITARY'S LEADERSHIP.
THE >> HE ALSO DISMISSED TOP LAWYERS FOR THE ARMY, NAVY AND AIR FORCE, WHAT DOES IT MEAN THAT HE FIRED ALL THESE TOP LAWYERS?
>> I THINK IT IS A CAN DO WHAT HE'S DONE WITH THE INSPECTORS AGENCIES.
HE IS GETTING RID OF OVERSIGHT AND MANY EXECUTIVE BRANCH CABINETS.
TOP JAG OFFICERS ARE NOT LEGAL ADVICE TO SHOW THE MILITARY HOW TO STAY OUT OF TROUBLE.
THEY ARE THERE TO PROTECT THE SERVICE AND THE COUNTRY AND THE LIVES OF THOSE THEY ARE CHARGED TO DEFEND AND PROTECT.
THEIR CLIENT IS NOT THE PRESIDENT.
THEIR CLIENT IS THE SAILORS, AIRMEN, MARINES, ET CETERA.
AND WHAT WE'VE SEEN FROM DONALD TRUMP IS THAT IF YOU ARE NOT WORKING FOR HIM, THERE IS NOT MUCH USE FOR YOU.
EVEN IF YOUR JOB SUCH AS THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT IS TO PROTECT THOSE PEOPLE, HE WANTS PEOPLE IN THOSE SEATS THAT ARE THERE TO SERVE HIM AND CARRY OUT HIS ORDERS.
>> WHEN PETE HEGSETH TALKS ABOUT RESTORING A WARRIOR EAT THOSE TO THEM MILITARY, YOU FOR HIM BUT WHAT DO YOU THINK HE IS TALKING ABOUT?
>> IF YOU YEARS AGO SENATOR TOM COTTON MADE A REMARK SAYING THAT THESE YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN JOINED THE FORCE BECAUSE THEY WANT TO KILL THE BAD GUYS.
I WILL TELL YOU THAT AFTER 20+ YEARS OF SERVICE, I'VE MET VERY FEW PEOPLE JOIN THE MILITARY BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO ENGAGE IN VIOLENCE.
THAT SAID, IF YOU CAN PUT ON THE UNIFORM YOU KNOW THAT YOU MAY BE EXPOSED TO VIOLENCE AND PEOPLE IN UNIFORM ARE WILLING TO CARRY OUT THEIR DUTIES IN THAT SITUATION.
BUT THEY DON'T JOINT TO ENGAGE IN VIOLENCE.
THEY NORMALLY JOINT TO HAVE ACCESS TO ACCESSIBILITY, PAY EQUALITY IS ALSO THERE.
THEY JOIN FOR STABILITY WHILE ALSO DOING SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN BE PROUD OF.
THEY DO NOT JOIN, THE VAST MAJORITY DO NOT JOIN TO PUT A BULLET IN SOMEONE'S HEAD OR BLOW UP A CITY.
SO IF THE WARRIOR ETHOS IS BEING MISTAKEN FOR THOSE WHO ENJOY ENGAGING IN VIOLENCE, THE MILITARY DOES NOT HAVE A PLACE FOR THAT.
CERTAINLY NOT A MILITARY AS LARGE AND PRECISE AS WE CAN BE.
INSTEAD WHAT WE ARE SEEING IS THIS SORT OF NOSTALGIA FOR A CARPET BOMBING MILITARY THAT INDISCRIMINATELY DESTROYS ENEMIES WITH NO THOUGHT TO COLLATERAL DAMAGE.
THAT IS NOT THE MILITARY WE ARE TODAY.
>> PETE HEGSETH ALSO SAID THAT THIS IS A REFLECTION OF THE PRESIDENT WANTING THE RIGHT PEOPLE AROUND HIM TO EXECUTE THE NATIONAL SECURITY APPROACH THAT WE WANT TO TAKE.
DOES THAT SUGGEST THAT THIS IS THE NORMAL COURSE OF BUSINESS?
THE ADMINISTRATION WANTING TO HAVE AS ITS ADVISERS, PEOPLE WHO SHARE THE PRESIDENT'S PURSUE NATIONAL SECURITY, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> EVERY PRESIDENT SHOULD WANT GENERALS AND ADMIRALS IN PLACE THAT WOULD EXECUTE THE NATION'S AGENDA.
AND PROTECT THEIR INTEREST.
THE QUESTION IS, ON THE WORD THERE, IT'S A VERY BASIC ONE, BUT THE RIGHT PERSON, HOW THEY DEFINE RIGHT IS NOT HOW THE MILITARY DEFINES RIGHT.
IT IS CONNECTED TO LOYALTY, IT IS CONNECTED TO ALL OF AVOIDANCE IS OF ANYTHING THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE TOUCHED BY ANYTHING DEI RELATED.
NOW WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT QUALIFICATIONS.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE BELIEVE IN OUR HISTORY, THE BELIEF THAT DIVERSITY IS A NATIONAL AND MILITARY STRENGTH.
PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE THE MILITARY SHOULD NOT BE POLITICIZED.
PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE IN THE OATH TO THE CONSTITUTION AND NOT TO THE WHITE HOUSE.
THOSE ARE ALSO THE RIGHT PEOPLE BUT THEY ARE PERSONA NON GRATA IN THIS ADMINISTRATION.
>> ALL OF THESE ROLES HAVE BEEN HELD BY A HIGHLY TRAINED PEOPLE WITH A LOT OF EXPERIENCE.
I WONDER HOW DEEP THE BENCH IS.
HOW EASY WILL IT BE TO REPLACE THESE PEOPLE?
>> IN TERMS OF TALENT, QUALIFICATIONS, RESUMES, ET CETERA, THE MILITARY IS THE MOST REPLACEABLE INSTITUTION IN THE COUNTRY.
WHEN YOU RETIRE THERE IS ANOTHER PERSON IN YOUR SEAT VERY QUICKLY.
THERE IS NO SHORTAGE OF QUALIFIED PEOPLE TO DO ALL THE JOBS THE NATION REQUIRES EVEN IF TRUMP AND HEGSETH WERE TO LET THE TOP FOLKS GO IN EACH PLACE.
THE BENCH IS DEEP BUT I DON'T THINK THEY ARE LOOKING AT THE DEEP BENCH, THEY ARE LOOKING AT THE LOYALTY BENCH WHO MIGHT SERVE.
>> WHAT HAPPENS TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE DISMISSED?
>> IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN.
IF YOU ARE A FOUR STAR YOU ARE PROBABLY GOING HOME AND WILL BE ABLE TO ENJOY RETIREMENT.
IT IS MORE DIFFICULT IF YOU ARE A COLONEL OR CAPTAIN.
A DISMISSAL DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN YOUR CAREER IS OVER EVEN THOUGH YOUR REPUTATION MAY BE STAINED.
EVEN IF IT IS OVER, YOU DON'T GET TO GO HOME THE NEXT DAY.
NOW YOU HAVE TO WALK AROUND IN UNIFORM THAT --AND YOU HAVE TO WAIT TO BE OUT PROCESSED.
NOTHING WILL BE SMOOTH ON THE POINT OF FIRING FORWARD, BUT IT IS NOT AS ABRUPT AS IT IS IN THE CIVILIAN WORLD.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT PATHS BUT MOST OF THEM DO NOT INCLUDE UPWARD MOBILITY.
MOST INCLUDE A HOLDING PATTERN UNTIL YOU LEAVE.
>> IT SEEMS THAT WOULD BE A REAL HIT TO MORALE.
>> ABSOLUTELY.
IT IS A TESTIMONY TO TO CONSIDER PEOPLE FOR PROMOTIONS OR FIRING IN THIS WAY.
NEVERMIND THE MORALE OF THE THREE OR FOUR STAR, THEIR PENSION WILL MAKE SURE THEY LIVE COMFORTABLY FOR SOME TIME.
BUT BELOW THEM, IF I WANTED TO BE THE CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEF OF STAFF WENDY AND I'VE BEEN IN THE MILITARY FIVE YEARS AND I'VE SEEN COLIN POWELL DO IT IN GENERAL BROWN DO IT AND THEN I SEE GENERAL BROWN GOT FIRED BECAUSE HE WAS CALLED A DEI PICK DESPITE HIS RECORD, I'VE SEEN COLIN POWELL KICKED OUT OF THE PARTY BECAUSE HE CONSIDERS RACE MORE IMPORTANT THAN VALUES BECAUSE HE CHOSE TO SUPPORT OBAMA OVER McCAIN, WHY WOULD I STICK AROUND IN A SERVICE THAT AUTOMATICALLY ASSUMES MY RACE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO ME, EVEN MORE THAN MY WORD TO OTHER PEOPLE, MY FAMILY AND MY COUNTRY.
IT HURTS MORALE UP AND DOWN THE TRAIN AND BEYOND THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IMMEDIATELY AFFECTED.
TRUMP SUPPORTER?
I'M CURIOUS ABOUT WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE FOR THEM.
>> IT IS A WILD TIME BUT I WILL TELL YOU, I HAVE FRIENDS THAT ARE TRUMP SUPPORTERS AND THEY ARE GUYS THAT I SERVED IN THE MILITARY WITH AND WE STAY IN TOUCH THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA AND THAT SORT OF THING, AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT THEY LOVE THE REMOVAL OF DEI FROM THE MILITARY.
THEY DO NOT LIKE THE CLAIM THAT DIVERSITY HAS MADE THE FORCE WEEKEND THE SUGGESTION, THE IMPLICATION THAT FOLKS OF COLOR WERE WOMEN WHO ARE SERVING OR LESS CAPABLE OR QUALIFIED.
TRUMP SUPPORTER, THAT LABEL DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY BELIEVE EVERYTHING TRUMP AND HEGSETH HAVE SAID ABOUT PEOPLE THAT THEY HAVE SERVED WITH.
REFORM IS NECESSARY, MAYBE SOME BOOKS THAT SHOULD NOT BE ON THE LIST, SO IT IS NOT THE SAME THING AS MOVING --REMOVING ALL THINGS DIVERSITY.
SO THEY ARE ABLE TO HOLD THE TWO TOGETHER BUT THERE ARE UNHAPPY CAMPERS, EVEN AMONG TRUMP SUPPORTERS IN BOTH THE PENTAGON AND RETIRED RANKS.
>> AFTER THE KILLING OF GEORGE FLOYD IN 2020, THE RECENTLY DISMISSED CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS SPOKE OUT IN A VIDEO ABOUT HIS EXPERIENCES AS AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN PILOT IN THE AIR FORCE.
DO YOU THINK THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY HE WAS FIRED?
>> I DO, ALTHOUGH I THINK IT WAS MORE OF A MESSAGING FIRING RATHER THAN ONE FOR PERFORMANCE OR COMPETENCE.
IT WAS STRICTLY JUST A POLITICAL MOVE.
NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.
AGAIN, THIS WAS A MAN APPOINTED BY TRUMP TO LEAVE THE AIR FORCE.
LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PREVIOUS CHAIRMAN FROM ARMY.
TRUMP APPOINTS HIM ARMY, HE SWINDLES WHILE WALKING ACROSS THE SQUARE TO THE CHURCH.
AND HE APOLOGIZES, SAYING I SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THERE, AND SO HE IS RETIRED NOW BUT THEY HAVE REMOVED HIS CLEARANCE AND SECURITY DETAIL AND HIS PICTURE FROM THE WALL AS FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE PENTAGON AND EVEN WRITTEN TO TAKE AWAY A STAR.
WHEN IT COMES TO MILITARY RETIREMENT, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT MILITARY MEMBERS, THAT IS SOMETHING THEY GUARD VERY CLOSELY.
AND IF IT BECOMES A HABIT THAT THEY START MESSING WITH VETERANS BENEFITS, THEY MAY OVERPLAY THEIR HAND ON THIS ONE.
>> WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE THAT THE FORCE HAS BEEN MORE DIVERSE THAN WE HAVE BEEN USED MATTER IF LEADERSHIP IS DIVERSE?
>> ABSOLUTELY.
BECAUSE THE COUNTRY IS DIVERSE AND WE HAVE ENDEAVORS FORCE.
IF YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT DIVERSITY AND YOU ONLY WANT IT, WAITMAN TO POPULATE THE SERVICE, GOOD LUCK FINDING ANYONE THAT WILL VOLUNTEER.
IF YOU DON'T HAVE PEOPLE AT THE TOP OF THE MILITARY WHO ARE LEADING THE MILITARY THAT ARE EXTREMELY DIVERSE YOU WILL FIND YOURSELF VERY SOON WITH A MILITARY THAT CAN'T MEET RECRUITING GOALS BECAUSE IT FEELS UNWELCOMING TO A LARGE SEGMENT OF PEOPLE YOU MUST RECRUIT FROM.
A DIVERSE NATION WITH A DIVERSE MILITARY REQUIRES DIVERSE LEADERSHIP.
IF YOU DON'T WANT DIVERSE LEADERSHIP YOU ARE SIGNALING THAT YOU DON'T WANT A DIVERSE MILITARY AND YOU WANT LEADERSHIP TO COME FROM ONLY ONE PEOPLE.
THIS IS THE REASON WHY DIVERSITY IS NOT JUST THE STRENGTH BUT NECESSITY AT EVERY LEVEL OF THE MILITARY FROM THE FRESH PERSON OUT OF BOOT CAMP TO THE MOST SENIOR ADMIRAL IN THE MILITARY.
>> WHEN DO YOU THINK WE MIGHT SEE THAT CONSEQUENCES OF THIS IF YOUR ANALYSIS IS CORRECT?
>> I THINK IT WILL BE WHEN, RECRUITING, NOT JUST THE NUMBERS STACKING UP BUT WHO IS JOINING, CHANGING.
RIGHT NOW WAITMAN JOINT AT THE HIGHEST RATE OF ANYONE IN THE COUNTRY.
SECOND, LACK WOMEN.
I DON'T KNOW IF WITHIN TWO OR THREE YEARS UNDER THIS KIND OF LEADERSHIP IF BLACK WOMEN WILL LOOK TO THE MILITARY FOR THE SAME KIND OF FINANCIAL AND EDUCATIONAL SECURITY.
OR IF EVERY MOVE THEY MAKE IS BECAUSE OF THE DEI CHOICE OR THEY ARE PUT IN THE BACK OFFICE AND NOT EVEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE THEIR RACE ARE CLOSED AND NO ONE IS ON THE OTHER SIDE THAT LOOKS LIKE THEM TO HELP THEM NAVIGATE THE SYSTEM.
WE WILL SEE A LOWERING IN RECRUITMENT.
AND THE OTHER THING, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL TAKE NOTICE, AS MUCH AS WE ARE , I THINK THOSE NUMBERS WILL ALSO DIP IF THE LEADERSHIP IS DEEMED TO BE POLITICAL AND UNFAIR AND ESSENTIALLY PRACTICING, EXERCISING PEOPLE'S LOYALTY INSTEAD OF THEIR COMPETENCIES AND CAPABILITY.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TALKING WITH US.
>> THESE ARE VERY WORRYING DEVELOPMENTS.
BACKTRACKING ON EQUALITY AND COMPETENCE.
MORE THAN 1000 MUSICIANS HAVE BANDED TOGETHER TO RELEASE AN ALBUM AND TO PROTEST PLANS HERE IN THE UK TO RELAX THE COPYRIGHT LAWS.
THE PROPOSED CHANGES WOULD ALLOW TECH FIRMS TO TRAIN A.I.
MODELS ON ANY MATERIAL THEY CAN LEGALLY ACCESS.
CREATORS WOULD HAVE TO TAKE THE INITIATIVE TO OPT OUT INDIVIDUALLY.
THE ALBUM CONTAINS 12 TRACKS WHOSE TITLES TOGETHER SAY THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT MUST NOT LEGALIZE USE OF THEFT TO BENEFIT A.I.
COMPANIES.
A GOVERNMENT SPOKESMAN SAID THAT THE CURRENT COPYRIGHT AND A.I.
GOVERNMENT WAS HOLDING BACK CREATIVE INDUSTRIES FROM REALIZING THEIR FULL POTENTIAL.
THAT IS IT FOR OUR PROGRAM TONIGHT, IF YOU WANT TO FIND OUT WHAT'S COMING OUT EVERY NIGHT, SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER AT PBS.ORG/AMANPOUR.
THANK YOU FOR WATCHING AND GOODBYE FOR NOW.