35 Burst results for "Mark Esper"
Bloomberg Radio New York
"mark esper" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"On the latest edition of the sound on podcast I talk with former defense secretary Mark Esper about the growing relationship between Russia and China. Well, clearly at this point, I mean, Russia is the junior partner. It's becoming a vassal state, if you will, if China, but just the same China needs, Russian technology, whether it's air defense systems or submarine technology. And certainly energy. That said, if it is discovered, learn that China is providing lethal aid to Ukraine. And I think The White House has to deliver on what it said would be serious consequences. In my view, that would be financial and economic sanctions, but the critical part will be getting our European and other Western Allies on board to do that. Because if we are not forceful, all China will do is expand its support to Russia, it will allow Russia to continue the war in Ukraine and this will drag on for years. Having a chance to talk since the drone incident over the Black Sea, now that The Pentagon has declassified the video, we saw the SU 27 dump and fuel and suddenly crashing into this thing. What happens next time we have a close encounter because that adjust our policy and I say that knowing that you endured in many secretaries have endured a series of long history of these close encounter interceptions with Russian aircraft over the years going back to the Cold War. I've said that we need to stand up for our rights, our legal right to fly and sell anywhere where it's legal. What they did was not only unprofessional, but really illegal on lawful. And so I think we should, again, reinstate our surveillance flights. I understand we already have. And if necessary, I've argued we should put a combat air patrol up there. And if Russian aircraft trying to approach it once again and place shenanigans with our with our drone, then we should be able to move our aircraft into position
Bloomberg Radio New York
"mark esper" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Arm the Taiwanese and give them the means today to defend themselves because that's what will deter some type of Chinese attack on Taiwan. As I say, you know that situation in Washington, the defense situation so well for having been in The Pentagon have it worked with The Pentagon. Can we walk and chew gum at the same time? And by that, I mean this is our move to really do whatever we can to support Ukraine deterring us or slowing us down from supplying Taiwan, the arms it needs. It shouldn't, but yet we seem to be moving too slow. We should have been charging up the defense industrial base months ago because it's hard to produce many of these munitions. It takes months. And in some cases, over a year to build certain types of missile systems and weapons platforms. And so I think we've been too slow there that's been a combination of bureaucratic red tape and not getting appropriations in time. But look, Congress has signaled in bipartisan fashion that want this to happen and we need to support Ukraine. And by the way, we need to support Taiwan as well. So I just think the bureaucracy needs to get moving because we really don't have time when you look at it. It takes a good amount of time to build stockpiles up. And if we believe that China may try and make a move on Taiwan and the coming years, we need to be prepared today to deal with that later. Okay, it's always such a pleasure to have you with us and very helpful. That's Mark Esper, of course, former Secretary of Defense under president Trump. He's the author of a sacred oath, memoirs of a Secretary of Defense during extraordinary times. Coming up, we're getting a sense of what chat GPT can do, but what should it do? We'll talk with
Mike Gallagher Podcast
Mark Esper: A Political Decision to Not Shoot Down the Balloon Earlier
"Trump's defense secretary Mark Esper visiting with Neil cavuto Saturday on Fox on Fox News. I think it's a fair decision if you will, to not shoot it down over populated areas out of fear of hurting somebody or severely damaging property. But you have to go back a few days before then. The question is, when did The Pentagon know that was entering our airspace? I'm confident that we knew soon enough that once it crossed into that airspace that we could have shot it down over open water, we could have shot it down over very dense sparse parts of Alaska. We should have shot it down then, but so it leads me to believe. A political decision was made by The White House not to do so for fear of interrupting the relationship with China.
Bloomberg Radio New York
"mark esper" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"In your podcast feed. On the latest sound on podcast, a conversation with former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper on supporting the war effort in Ukraine. What we need are armor, heavy armor, tanks, because tanks lead the push, they punch through the lines, they have the mobility, the firepower, and the protection to do so while safeguarding the force. And that's the critical missing element right now. For the most part, the Brits have promised to provide 14 challenger tanks, but what you need are tanks and the triple digits to make this real. So Mark Esper, what is the timeline as we work this out with Germany, whether it's leopards, M ones, whatever end up there. How much time do we have before it's too late? Not much. I mean, look, time is now. That's why I think we are moving now. It takes at least the United States, of course, to ship them, would take weeks. You have to get them to the units within Ukraine. You have to train up the soldiers, not just to operate them, but to maintain them. So this process could take several weeks a couple of months, and then you look at the timeline for the year. When does the weather start improving for either the Russians to conduct an offensive, whether Ukrainians to beat them to the punch And again, while it's important that we provided Bradley's and strikers, you would never send those vehicles into a battle against Russian armor. You have to leave with your own tanks. And that's where the Germans become the critical component here. I want to ask you specifically about the M1 Abrams tanks. Number one, you know, they're very expensive to maintain. It also involves a lot of training that would be necessary. They have a jet engine essentially in them. And as I understand burn three gallons to the mile, is that even practical for Ukraine? No, I think the German leopards are the better choice here. I've been critical of the administration for being behind the curve when it comes to sending other weapon systems and air defense systems and whatnot, but in this case
Bloomberg Radio New York
"mark esper" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Is a limited supply of onion rings largely because 2022 was a bad year for crops and interview with Bloomberg. He also said the cost and availability of French fries is a concern adding that prices for the two items have gone up dramatically along with the cost of frying oil. A son who says this is an industry wide concern and prices will continue to go up for diners. Karen Moscow, Bloomberg radio. Global news 24 hours a day on air and on Bloomberg quicktake powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. I'm Susanna Palmer. This is Bloomberg. Bloomberg radio on demand and in your podcast feed. On the latest sound on podcast, a conversation with former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper on supporting the war effort in Ukraine. What we need are armor, heavy armor, tanks, because tanks lead the push. They punch through the lines, they have the mobility, the firepower, and the protection to do so while safeguarding the force. And that's the critical missing element right now. For the most part, the Brits have promised to provide 14 challenger tanks, but what you need are tanks and the triple digits to make this real. So Mark Esper, what is the timeline as we work this out with Germany, whether it's leopards, M ones, whatever end up there. How much time do we have before it's too late? Not much. I mean, look, time is now. That's why I think we are moving now. It takes at least for the United States, of course, to ship them, would take weeks. You have to get them to the units within Ukraine. You have to train up the soldiers, not just to operate them, but to maintain them. So this process could take several weeks, a couple of months, and then you look at the timeline for the year. When does the weather start improving for either the Russians to conduct an offensive, whether Ukrainians to beat them to the punch. And again, while it's important that we provided Bradley's and strikers, you would never send those vehicles into a battle against Russian armor. You have to leave with your own tanks. And that's where the Germans become the critical component here. I want to ask you specifically about the M1 Abrams tanks. Number one, you know, they're very expensive to maintain. It also involves a lot of training that would be necessary. They have a jet engine essentially in them and as I understand burn three gallons to the mile. Is that even practical for Ukraine? No, I think the German leopards are the better choice here. I've been critical of the administration for being behind the curve when it comes to sending other weapon systems and air defense systems and whatnot. But in
Bloomberg Radio New York
"mark esper" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"The latest sound on podcast, a conversation with former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper on supporting the war effort in Ukraine. What we need are armor, heavy armor, tanks, because tanks lead the push. They punch through the lines, they have the mobility, the firepower, and the protection to do so while safeguarding the force. And that's the critical missing element right now. For the most part, the Brits have promised to provide 14 challenger tanks, but what you need are tanks and the triple digits to make this real. So Mark Esper, what is the timeline as we work this out with Germany, whether it's leopards, M ones, whatever end up there. How much time do we have before it's too late? Not much. I mean, look, time is now. That's why I think we are moving now. It takes at least the United States, of course, to ship them, would take weeks. You have to get them to the units within Ukraine. You have to train up the soldiers, not just to operate them, but to maintain them. So this process could take several weeks a couple of months. And then you look at the timeline for the year. When does the weather start improving for either the Russians to conduct an offensive, whether Ukrainians to beat them to the punch. And again, while it's important that we provided Bradley's and strikers, you would never send those vehicles into a battle against Russian armor. You have to leave with your own tanks. And that's where the Germans become the critical component here. I want to ask you specifically about the M1 Abrams tanks. Number one, you know, they're very expensive to maintain. It also involves a lot of training that would be necessary. They have a jet engine essentially in them. And as I understand burn three gallons to the mile, is that even practical for Ukraine? No, I think the German leopards are the better choice here. I've been critical of the administration for being behind the curve when it comes to sending other weapon systems and air defense systems and whatnot. But in this case
Bloomberg Radio New York
"mark esper" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Bloomberg radio on demand and in your podcast feed. On the latest sound on podcast, a conversation with former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper on supporting the war effort in Ukraine. What we need are armor, heavy armor, tanks, because tanks lead the push. They punch through the lines, they have the mobility, the firepower, and the protection to do so while safeguarding the force. And that's the critical missing element right now. For the most part, the Brits have promised to provide 14 challenger tanks, but what you need are tanks and the triple digits to make this real. So Mark Esper, what is the timeline as we work this out with Germany, whether it's leopards, M ones, whatever end up there. How much time do we have before it's too late? Not much. I mean, look, time is now. That's why I think we are moving now. It takes at least for the United States, of course, to ship them, would take weeks. You have to get them to the units within Ukraine. You have to train up the soldiers, not just to operate them, but to maintain them. So this process could take several weeks, a couple of months. And then you look at the timeline for the year. When does the weather start improving for either the Russians to conduct an offensive, whether Ukrainians to beat them to the punch. And again, while it's important that we provided Bradley's and strikers, you would never send those vehicles into a battle against Russian armor. You have to leave with your own tanks. And that's where the Germans become the critical component here. I want to ask you specifically about the M1 Abrams tanks. Number one, you know, they're very expensive to maintain. It also involves a lot of training that would be necessary. They have a jet engine essentially in them and as I understand burn three gallons to the mile. Is that even practical for Ukraine? No, I think the German leopards are the better choice here. I've been critical of the administration for being behind the curve when it comes to sending other weapon systems and air defense systems and whatnot. But in this case
Bloomberg Radio New York
"mark esper" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"The latest sound on podcast, a conversation with former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper on supporting the war effort in Ukraine. What we need are armor, heavy armor, tanks, because tanks lead the push. They punch through the lines, they have the mobility, the firepower, and the protection to do so while safeguarding the force. And that's the critical missing element right now. For the most part, the Brits have promised to provide 14 challenger tanks, but what you need are tanks and the triple digits to make this real. So Mark Esper, what is the timeline as we work this out with Germany, whether it's leopards, M ones, whatever end up there. How much time do we have before it's too late? Not much. I mean, look, time is now. That's why I think we are moving now. It takes at least the United States, of course, to ship them, would take weeks. You have to get them to the units within Ukraine. You have to train up the soldiers, not just to operate them, but to maintain them. So this process could take several weeks a couple of months, and then you look at the timeline for the year. When does the weather start improving for either the Russians to conduct an offensive, whether Ukrainians to beat them to the punch. And again, while it's important that we provided Bradley's and strikers, you would never send those vehicles into a battle against Russian armor. You have to leave with your own tanks. And that's where the Germans become the critical component here. I want to ask you specifically about the M1 Abrams tanks. Number one, you know, they're very expensive to maintain. It also involves a lot of training that would be necessary. They have a jet engine essentially in them and as I understand burn three gallons to the mile. Is that even practical for Ukraine? No, I think the German leopards are the better choice here. I've been critical of the administration for being behind the curve when it comes to sending other weapons systems and air defense systems and whatnot. But in this case, they're right. Get
WTOP
"mark esper" Discussed on WTOP
"In front of the target and the mosaic district, it's to raise money for the organization's more than 18,000 athletes with intellectual disabilities. Check ins will start at noon with the actual plunging at one 15. Advanced registration is open, according to special Olympic Virginia's website participants have already raised over $20,000. The loophole that allowed a direct route from service academies to professional football will close this year. The 2023 defense authorization act bill will only allow service academy graduates to accept professional sports contracts two years after graduation. Back in 2019, a memo from defense secretary Mark Esper at the direction of president Trump allowed academy athletes to defer service or repay their tuition if they opted to play professional sports. Federal news network reports it required permission from the secretary's office. Since then, several top football players have gone pro after academy graduation, like offensive lineman Brett toth for the Philadelphia Eagles. Coming up in money news. A D.C. startups app for job seekers with invisible disabilities. I'm Jeff Gable. Three 43. Hiring the right talent is my number one priority for my growing company. I used to believe that if you post it, they will come was the only way to recruit new employees. However, after months of being ghosted by candidates, and having more empty chairs than employees made me fire the dot coms, and reach out to 2060 digital. Their team of experts created and
Bloomberg Radio New York
"mark esper" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"Are trying to determine if Russia attack NATO territory. However, President Biden says that the G 20 summit, it's unlikely the missile was fired from Russia. We agreed to support Poland's investigation into the explosion in rural Poland near the Ukrainian border and I'm going to make sure we figure out exactly what happened. Sources tell President Biden are sources saying that President Biden is telling allies the blast was caused by Ukraine air defense systems. Yeah, Poland's president saying that now as well Karen. But last night, Ukraine's president Vladimir zelensky called the strike an escalation. Hitting missiles on NATO territory. This is a Russian missile attack on collective security. This is a very significant escalation. Ukraine's Vladimir's landscape also called for an end to the war in an address to G 20 leaders. While Nathan, there's still no confirmation on the exact source of the blast, NATO ambassadors are meeting in Brussels for emergency talks on the situation. Former defense secretary Mark Esper two is preaching caution. My suspicion is that this was an accidental firing caused by either poor targeting or a malfunction by one of the Russian missiles. We need to go through a deliberate process investigated out and come to the facts. Forward defense secretary Mark Esper spoke to our Washington correspondent Joe Matthew on Bloomberg sound on, catch the show weekdays at 5 p.m. eastern on Bloomberg radio. Back here in the U.S., Karen politics is front and center with a familiar name back in the spotlight. Former president Donald Trump's made an announcement many already knew was coming. In order to make America great a glorious again, I am tonight announcing my candidacy
Monocle 24: The Foreign Desk
"mark esper" Discussed on Monocle 24: The Foreign Desk
"And so I think maybe that kind of added to his sense that there was weakness or lack of resolve in Washington. And that's, again, that's an important thing. Is you have to have both capability and resolve. If deterrence is going to succeed. We're coming towards the end of our time. So I just want to ask a couple of questions again going back to the key theme of your book, which is the dilemma posed, if you will, by a sense of duty and sense of responsibility to your country. At the time that you were serving as Secretary of Defense, where was the balance for you between feeling like you were defending the United States from its enemies and defending the United States from its president? Of course, we're always defending the United States from our adversaries and supporting our allies and partners at the same time. And, you know, I think it's in those final 6, 7, 8, 9 months of 2020. I think as I described in a book when the president beats impeachment and he brings in more loyalists and he starts making changes as one of these outlandish ideas start cropping up within The White House and not just from the president by people around him from the National Security Council. So it's probably that point in time, I think, beginning the summer of 2020 where I thought I needed to be really on guard in terms of folks wanting to misuse the military for political purposes. And that those were, of course, two of the two of the four knows that I talk about in the book. And just finally and finally, because this was the final moment for you as Secretary of Defense. It is when you're fired a few days after the presidential election in 2020. And I understand, I think, from this interview and from the book, why you chose to stay in post and not speak up up until that point. But at that moment, when you've been fired and Donald Trump is still president and there's clearly a dangerous and turbulent moment ahead, why not at that point not speak up? Well, there was not necessarily a clearly clear and dangerous moment up ahead. I'm fired on November 9th, he begins objecting to the electoral results, you know, within a week or two after that. And that's not inconsistent with previous presidents. If you think there's problems with the election, you certainly have the right to go the courts and challenges. So I didn't see January 6th at that point in time. Frankly, my view was I'd gotten two and through the election and had done my duty and we were successful and president Trump lost. Period. So what was there to speak up about? I certainly didn't foresee what would happen on January 6th. Now, of course, as we get closer to the end of December and early January, when you hear some of these stories come up coming out about The White House, I joined with my other 9 living Secretary of Defense and we write that opinion piece in Washington Post warning DoD and others to follow their oath and make sure.
Monocle 24: The Foreign Desk
"mark esper" Discussed on Monocle 24: The Foreign Desk
"I feel like I'm asking here on behalf of pretty much every current and former politician from the Baltic states we've been speaking to over the last few months. Well, look, first thing, I got to give a lot of credit to your prime minister and to my old colleague Ben Wallace, I think UK leadership has been exceptional in this regard, both the support of morale, the diplomatic support, the material support, and so I think the Brits have been real leaders here in this conflict. But to your specific question, look, the frontline states have always been concerned about Russia because they have a history. And they don't have a buffer, right? Like the Italians do or the Germans do and others between them and Russia. So history matters here and the history has proven that a Russian leader like Vladimir Putin is back to their old games, want to expand or reassert an imperial empire. So I think they've been right all along. I want to think that the United States and the UK have always support them and have agreed with their instincts. What we need to do is get the rest of NATO on board with that and specifically I'm talking about the French and the Germans and the Italians. They need to step up and all the other countries in terms of spending more and taking this Russian threat more seriously. My concern right now going forward is that some of these countries are going to start getting wobbly because the sanctions are going to are hitting them and hurting their economies as well. There is obviously another Russia related question which does go back to your time working for president Trump, and that is, again, as somebody who saw him up close, where did you get to on the idea that he was or is in some way on the hook to Russia? I never had that sense. I mean, I know that was popular in the media back here. But I never had the sense that he was on the hook, so to speak, to Russia. I mean, you've got to keep in mind that he was the president that approved a cell of lethal arms to Ukraine in 2017. He approved the continuance of training of the Ukrainians in western Ukraine, I'd been there observed a training. So I never got that sense, but clearly he had a relationship with Vladimir Putin. He tried to cultivate that. In some ways at times, undermining our own intelligence agencies or undermining our own policy. But I didn't get the sense that he was on some type of hook, if you will. I mean, you've made it clear in the book and indeed you've made it clear in this interview that you wouldn't be hastening to vote to reelect him. But when you think back on the time that you worked for him, did he and perhaps not even deliberately or consciously, but did he have any strengths do you think as a president? Oh yeah, look, every leader has strengths and weaknesses, some more than others. And I try to be very fair to him and others in the book. And, you know, at a personal level I'll tell you that the president was very engaging. You could call him up any time of the day or night. Any day of the week, and he would call you. And that's, by the way, is unusual between presidents and cabinet members in administration. So he was very open and transparent. I thought that was a positive, if you will..
Monocle 24: The Foreign Desk
"mark esper" Discussed on Monocle 24: The Foreign Desk
"About shooting the protesters in the legs. And so at that point, I just thought we've reached, we've reached a place where it's hard to serve anymore. And then I might resign there. You know, that day that week. And I've learned over the many years, as you should always sleep on a decision, which is what I did. And I came back to, as I wrestled with this, that I was able to stop that at that moment. I was able to push back on the president, suggest alternatives and prevent the deployment of active duty troops into Washington D.C. and, you know, of course, also prevent the shooting of people. So I felt that my presence there was a positive and I was able to do things that may be if the president, if I walked away and the president installed a loyalist, that loyalist may go along with some of these outlandish ideas. So that was these types of moments where I was able to successfully push back or divert that I thought I was better off staying. I mean, at those moments, though, and you do have an extraordinary perspective of somebody who was in the room when president Trump was making these decisions. Did it ever strike you that there was any grand philosophy or strategy underpinning this sort of thing or is he exclusively a creature of impulse? You write elsewhere in the book that as he put yazu put it, his views on the use of force swung back and forth like a pendulum, though even a pendulum has some predictability. The president rarely gave us much at all. You almost seem to suggest as well when you're writing about the decision to target the Iranian general Qasem Soleimani that the day before or the day after president Trump might have decided something completely different. No, it is impulsive. It's emotional. These are emotional reactions to the events. And of course, you know, we had the tragic murder of George Floyd. Days before it results in protests across the country..
America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast
Where Are the PROSECUTIONS?! Jim Hanson Weighs In
"I've had Matt Gaetz and empty G on the show regularly for something we call the America first strategy sessions. And they have this great vision, Matt said, when we win in the midterms, God willing, we're going to turn every single committee of Congress into investigator committee. We're not going to have special standing once everyone, whether it's ag, whether it's justice, whether it's national defense and armed forces, will be an investigative committee. We're going to subpoena the crap out of these cowards and treasonous individuals. And I thought, yeah, that's interesting like that. But then I realized, I don't care about subpoenas. I don't care about another inspector general's report that leads to nada, okay? I want prosecutions. If lady liberty truly wears a blindfold, then if you have been a seditionist traitorous piece of scum using their clearances like John Brennan like vindman like Eric sharmilla to subvert the will of the people, even if you're a Trump appointe when Mark Esper says, I was defending America as the Secretary of Defense from the president. You go and how many people voted for you Mark exactly schwanz only none, then you should be up on charges. So I've never been called a radical by conservatives, but I think it's time to find because it's not going to be fed. It's going to be a county prosecutor. It's going to be somebody in a Republican state that says, you know what? Mark Esper, you undermined my safety and the safety of my citizens as well. I'm going to prosecute you. Is this a crazy wish list? No. I mean, rule number one, we're in a war. We're fighting for the heart of the republic. And any tool, any weapon we have that you don't use is idiotic. And another one that I like, all right, those are good ways. But even in Congress, they can write into the appropriation bills things they can and can not do. But they never do that. They never do that right in there. Diversity, equity, and inclusion is not dead. Done. Right. No more. CRT. Zero money, no money spent on it. And I think they need to
NPR's Book of the Day
"mark esper" Discussed on NPR's Book of the Day
"The Trump administration's former defense secretary Mark Esper has a new book out this week. It's called a sacred oath, memoirs of a Secretary of Defense during extraordinary times. He spoke with our co host Michelle Martin about the book, in it Esper says that former president Trump asked him and joint chiefs of staff chairman Mark milley about shooting protesters. This was in the summer of 2020 during a meeting about unrest that took place after the murder of George Floyd. The meeting started off pretty loud. The president was enraged. He was very upset at what had been happening and it happened the night before. He was, he thought that the protests made the country look weak, made us look weak and us met him. And he wanted to do something about it. And as we went back and forth discussing a number of things to include the deployment of 10,000 active duty troops, as you mentioned, we reached that point in the conversation where he he looked frankly at general milley and said, can't you just shoot them? Just shoot them in the legs or something. And it was not just a question in the form of a suggestion and a form of question. And we were just all taken aback at that moment as this issue just hung very heavily in the air. What was going through your mind? Look, I entered West Point at the age of 18. And so I'd spent 21 years in uniform both active duty and reserve. And then served in worked in other parts of the national security enterprise, if you will, for another ten or so years. And so, of course, ingrained in me were the concepts of duty on our country, a professional ethic, the proper relationship between the military and civilian society. And as part and parcel of that, we, of course, we studied Ken state and past engagements such as that. And so when this, when the president raises, I mean, needless to say we were shocked, at least I was shocked. I'll speak for myself that this would even be suggested, let alone be raised, how would you go about doing that? How can you just shoot them, if you will? And again, I was taken aback. I know, since general milley and I talked afterwards. So was he just shocked by the whole idea? And this was not normal behavior. And of course, the context is the president is standing up sitting down. He's red faced. He's angry. He's yelling at us. He's swearing at us. And this goes on for 2025 minutes. And it's obviously the toughest meeting. I probably ever had. So you talk about how in the book that you and general milley said to yourselves, you know, I'm this close to quitting. And you talk extensively in the book about that dilemma, you're not the only member of that administration who had that conversation with himself or with others close to him, people who shared his or her sense of professional ethics. So it obviously you want people to read the book. But as briefly as you can, why didn't you? I mean, why did you stick around? And why did so many others? At the end of the day, after talking to my wife to my predecessors in previous administration, I came down to two things. A if I left, I was very concerned about what would happen and would some of these dangerous ideas be implemented. And secondly, if I left, who would be who would replace me, and I was fairly confident that the president would replace me with an Uber loyalist, if you will, who would do exactly what he wanted..
The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast
"mark esper" Discussed on The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast
"I mean, I would just talking about Venezuela. Check this out from axios. Former defense secretary Mark Esper, told 60 minutes in an interview airing that he had to S.W.A.T. down some quote dangerous ideas like military action against Venezuela and Iran during his time in the Trump administration. I mean, this I sent this to you because I knew you would be hopping mad. Well, you know, I don't know if you recall this, but a general, an exiled general from Venezuela reached out to me. And wanted to find out if there was any way that they could get a group of exiled military from Venezuela because they're spread out all over the world. They had to flee Venezuela. So they were, you know, he said thousands of these exiled military people that were all over the world that wanted wanted to come together and have some kind of a plan to go into Venezuela and essentially demolish the regime. And this is important because what Debbie's getting at it, we're not talking about the deployment of America. Our military. No. The Venezuelans said, we'll do it. And what they were looking for is just organization and some logistical support. I mean, this is nothing more than the Reagan doctrine. The Reagan doctrine is the people fight for their own freedom. We don't fight, but we help. And that's what they were kind of asking for. And you were exploring. I was trying to get him connected with people. But I kept getting resistance from and some people in the Trump administration said that it was coming from the State Department. And so now we know who it was coming from. Well, what Esper is basically saying evidently, and we don't know if this goes all the way up to Trump, there were evidently people high up in the Trump administration who were considering options like military action against Iran. Not by the way, there were certain surgical strikes Soleimani and so on that were made. But the Venezuela operation is a completely different magnitude because Iran is a big country. Iran potentially is close to if it doesn't already have access to nuclear weapons. But Venezuela is a relatively small country. This is basically a regime that can be taken out if America made a decision to do it. But you have to remember that Iran is in Venezuela. Iran isn't it? So you have to remember that if we fight Venezuela, we're also fighting Iran, China, and Russia. Because all three of them are in there. That is like their little golden pie. But if let's step back, we have a war going on in Ukraine and Russia's position is Ukraine as our backyard. You stay out of it because you know what? We have a right to have countries in our backyard that are hospitable and friendly to us. Right. Let's apply the same logic to America. Right. Venezuela's in our backyard. We have a right. This is basically the Monroe doctrine. Refurbished. We have a right to have countries in our backyard that are hospitable and friendly to us. And so Putin stay out of this. This is nothing to do with you. China, stay out of it. So evidently, all of this was being discussed. Now interestingly, very little of this debate percolated out the public was sort of not let in on it and asked for who obviously thinks that he's some kind of a night in shining armor. Goes, I was the one who stopped it. I was the one who stopped to sit a responsible discussion from going forward. Well, it turns out that Esper is the fool here because these are interesting things that Trump was thinking that were apparently being considered. And it would have been nice to at least put those options on the table and let in not just the American people in general, but at least the sort of community that discusses these kinds of issues to be able to weigh in on it. What are the advantages? What are the risks? We're having that debate to some degree about Ukraine. Why couldn't we have had it about Iran and about Venezuela? And I can tell you from just my family, my elderly aunt, she is so what's my president doing these days? She calls Trump her president. This is a Venezuelan woman who is in Venezuela, suffering under the regime of this horrific man. Now some leftists will go, well, she's enamored, but the cult of Trump knows. I think the Venezuelans know that they can not count on the Democrats. So the Democrats are basically okay with their capacity. They are in bed, and I'm going to talk about the. Well, I'm going to tell you I'm going to talk about this a little later. There is a person that, in fact, I don't have his name written down, but he's in deep in the Biden administration who is very, very chummy with Maduro and has been seen in Venezuela parting with those people. So this is very, very bad, it makes for just makes my blood boil because as you know, this was my issue with, you know, it has been for a long time. And I personally feel that Venezuela is not just because I was born there and I have family there and they're suffering, but I feel like if we do not help this country, Iran and China and Russia are going to take it over and then we're going to have a very, very bad enemy 1300 miles away. Not only it's not just a strategic access, but it's also the Venezuela is rich in oil and minerals. So it is a kind of jewel, a treasure that these countries have their eye on. And under the Maduro regime, they are being let in. It's not just that Maduro is an ally. You have Iranians in the parliament. Oh yes, it is full of Iranians. And in fact, it has, for a long time, been that way, but it is very dangerous that we are letting it happen right before our army. And the country is so far gone now that the solution, if it comes at all, almost certainly has to come from the outside. Imagine the lifelong impact of a journey to.
The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast
Mark Esper Says He Prevented 'Dangerous Things' During the Trump Years
"I mean, I would just talking about Venezuela. Check this out from axios. Former defense secretary Mark Esper, told 60 minutes in an interview airing that he had to S.W.A.T. down some quote dangerous ideas like military action against Venezuela and Iran during his time in the Trump administration. I mean, this I sent this to you because I knew you would be hopping mad. Well, you know, I don't know if you recall this, but a general, an exiled general from Venezuela reached out to me. And wanted to find out if there was any way that they could get a group of exiled military from Venezuela because they're spread out all over the world. They had to flee Venezuela. So they were, you know, he said thousands of these exiled military people that were all over the world that wanted wanted to come together and have some kind of a plan to go into Venezuela and essentially demolish the regime. And this is important because what Debbie's getting at it, we're not talking about the deployment of America. Our military. No. The Venezuelans said, we'll do it. And what they were looking for is just organization and some logistical support. I mean, this is nothing more than the Reagan doctrine. The Reagan doctrine is the people fight for their own freedom. We don't fight, but we help. And that's what they were kind of asking for. And you were exploring. I was trying to get him connected with people. But I kept getting resistance from and some people in the Trump administration said that it was coming from the State Department. And so now we know who it was coming
77WABC Radio
"mark esper" Discussed on 77WABC Radio
"Instead Mark Esper In his silly book where he comes off as just fantastic you know He's just terrific And of course at Trump's expense And so he's on 60 minutes with Nora O'Donnell who we read is getting on thin ice and it probably doesn't get along with some of the staff In her building I'm guessing That's what they say Let's take a little listen so I could cut 18 go It's important to our country It's important to the republic the American people that they understand what was going on It's very consequential period The last year of the Trump administration And to tell the story about things we prevented really bad things dangerous things They could have taken the country in a dark direction What kind of terrible things did you prevent At various times during the certainly the last year of the administration you have folks in The White House are proposing to take military action against Venezuela That's not crazy You may not agree with it But that's not nutty And you have different proposals coming to a president On the circumstances Go ahead Iran It says to strike Iran Well Israel wanted to strike Iran I suppose president Trump was thinking about it too I mean after all they keep threatening to have nuclear weapons and hit us Does this sound crazy to you mister proposed And mister producer
Mark Levin
Mark Esper Details 'Crazy' Ideas on Trump's World Affairs
"Instead Mark Esper In his silly book where he comes off as just fantastic you know He's just terrific And of course at Trump's expense And so he's on 60 minutes with Nora O'Donnell who we read is getting on thin ice and it probably doesn't get along with some of the staff In her building I'm guessing That's what they say Let's take a little listen so I could cut 18 go It's important to our country It's important to the republic the American people that they understand what was going on It's very consequential period The last year of the Trump administration And to tell the story about things we prevented really bad things dangerous things They could have taken the country in a dark direction What kind of terrible things did you prevent At various times during the certainly the last year of the administration you have folks in The White House are proposing to take military action against Venezuela That's not crazy You may not agree with it But that's not nutty And you have different proposals coming to a president On the circumstances Go ahead Iran It says to strike Iran Well Israel wanted to strike Iran I suppose president Trump was thinking about it too I mean after all they keep threatening to have nuclear weapons and hit us Does this sound crazy to you mister proposed And mister producer
WTOP
"mark esper" Discussed on WTOP
"Tied to COVID funding Some favors splitting the issues so there's no delay in getting Ukraine more badly needed military equipment On Capitol Hill Mitchell Miller WTO news Afghanistan's Taliban leadership has ordered all Afghan women to wear all covering clothing in public The decree is similar to restrictions on women during the Taliban's previous hardline rule between 1996 and 2001 South Korea's military says the north has fired a suspected ballistic missile designed to be launched from a submarine apparently continuing a provocative streak in weapons demonstrations that may end up with a nuclear test in the coming weeks or months In a new book former defense secretary Mark Esper writes about then president Donald Trump suggestion to shoot missiles into Mexico The president pulls me aside on at least a couple occasions and suggests that maybe we have the U.S. Military shoot missiles into Mexico Shoot missiles into Mexico for what He would say to go after the cartels And we would have this private discussion where I'd say mister president I understand the motive because he was very serious about dealing with drugs in America I get that We all understand But I had to explain to him we can't do that It would violate international law CBS News anchor Nora O'Donnell talks with Esper for this Sunday's 60 minutes Coming up after traffic and weather a possible pay raise for some who toil on Capitol Hill Ten 36 Responds to the all new diamonds direct has been incredible People here can't believe what diamonds direct has brought to the D.C. area It's a stunning showroom Unlike any jewelry store you've ever seen.
WCPT 820
"mark esper" Discussed on WCPT 820
"That Macron just squeaked by But Macron is sort of the Bill Clinton of French politics only Bill Clinton is no longer popular in France kind of thing Bill Clinton is very popular president when he was president Every president has their moment right But that moment that neoliberal moment when yeah let's ship jobs overseas Let's cut taxes on rich people Let's cut taxes on corporations Et cetera That moment has gone And it's gone in France too And melon is the guy who has put this thing together My apologies if I'm mangling his name As I said earlier I don't speak French But they now have four parties the French Socialist Party the French Communist Party the socialist Jean Luc melons France unbowed party and the green parties These four French parties have formed a coalition and they are only going to put up one candidate in each of the different 70 different They call them constituencies basically what we would call a congressional district You know the people running for parliament This coalition is going to put up one candidate in each No more divide and conquer in France And I think this is absolutely fascinating This is as the BBC said they said instead of running against each other in the parliamentary elections socialist greens communists and supporters of France onboard will share one candidate for constituency thus the greatly increasing their chances The last time this happened as I mentioned was 20 years ago So FYI The other story I wanted to share with you real quickly and then I'll pick up your phone calls here and then goes Friday is un bleeping believable is the headline bob Brigham writing over at Ross story dot com Experts weigh in on the shocking Trump revelations to Mark Esper Mark Esper was the last Senate confirmed Secretary of Defense that Donald Trump had And he just published a book and in this book he just reveals how insane Donald Trump was That he wanted he desperately wanted the American military to shoot Black Lives Matter protesters in the legs And when they refused to do it when Mark Esper refused to go along with this not only did Trump scream at him obscenities but he also dragged Mike Pence in and screamed obscenities at him Then he goes to ask burn says why don't we why don't we send missiles down to Mexico and take out the drug traffickers with missiles Yeah it turns out that this is actually this was actually the scheme of a movie The Tom Clancy movie clear and present in nature It was basically the plot This is from 1989 and it.
The Ben Shapiro Show
Ex-Pentagon chiefs warn against using US military in election disputes
"Living former defense secretaries have joined together to push back on any talk about involving the military and resolving election dispute. 10. Former defense chiefs, including Trump Appointees, Mark Esper and Jim Mattis, wrote an op ed in the Washington Post today. They said the time for questioning the election results has passed. Furthermore, they said, any effort to involve the military in election disputes would be a dangerous, unlawful and unconstitutional step. Former Vice President Dick Cheney, who served as defense secretary under George H. W. Bush also signed onto the statement.
AP News Radio
Pentagon installs 2 Trump allies on defense advisory board
"The Pentagon is ousted the members of the defense advisory board and replace them with eleven new members including two campaign advisers to president trump acting defense secretary Christopher Miller installed last month after the firing of mark esper announced the purge of the nine member defense business board which provides Pentagon leaders with independent advice and recommendations from a private sector perspective nine were let go and eleven new members have been appointed including Corey Lewandowski and David Bossie trump loyalists who worked on both of his presidential campaigns the Pentagon's also announced it's pulling most U. S. troops out of Somalia a post election pushed by president trump to shrink US involvement abroad Jackie Quinn Washington
Morning News with Manda Factor and Gregg Hersholt
Trump set on veto of defense bill over renaming bases honoring Confederates
"President Trump is reportedly threatening to veto a massive defense funding bill in a dispute over renaming military bases. Bipartisan defense bill would rename bases that honor Confederate military leaders, something that Trump has long opposed. The dispute was reportedly one of the reasons why Trump abruptly fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper after the presidential election. Final passage of the defense bill is
Forum
What's behind Trump's decision to withdraw troops abroad
"Announced yesterday that it will continue to withdraw U. S troops from Afghanistan and Iraq, leaving 2500 and each nation by January. 15th. Moved through bipartisan rebukes from lawmakers and some top military commanders who say the troop reduction is premature and could further destabilize Afghanistan. In particular. The announcement comes as President Trump continues to install loyalists at the Pentagon and a week after he fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper. Going to talk about what's behind the with the drawdown in Iraq and Afghanistan and other foreign and military policy decisions that the Trump Administration is making in this lame duck period. And joining us is Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations. His most recent book is The world. A brief introduction and welcome back to form Richard House. Good to have you Always good to be with you, Michael. And let's begin by talking about this pull back, and I should mention we're not only talking about Afghanistan and Iraq. We're also talking about Somalia. But this is being done at a time January 15th, which is just days before five days before The Biden administration will presumably be moving in now in limbo. And what does that mean in terms of national security that there's no transition yet? Well, there's no upside the fact that there's no transition Can only hurt whoever. Whenever Joe Biden does take over and let's just say January 20th, he's going to inherit an extraordinarily difficult in box. And the more time he and his team have to prepare for it, The better the country will be, so there's nothing to be gained by delaying the transition. The array of international challenges is Is extraordinary. In terms of what you began the show with you set it up exactly right. This is being determined not by local conditions unless by local you mean the trump White House. This is a political calendar rather than on the ground conditions in Afghanistan or Iraq or anywhere else. It's inappropriate. I would argue to do this during any transition. Again. What's what's driving this? I believe it's always dangerous toe project with my I believe it's Mr Trump's desire to make good. On certain promises he made. It's consistent with his world view, which tends to be relatively unilateralists, an isolationist, but it will not be good either for the situation in any of these countries or for America's long term efforts, among other things, against terrorism or for our reputation for reliability. Well, let's talk about some of those concerns because they are profound, and they're certainly deep in so many ways, And we should mention perhaps the fact that the president had promised to get troops up. My Christmas is just cutting them in half. But the last time there was a major pullout from Iraq, it led to the rise of the Islamic state there and in Syria, and there's great concern and understandably so about well the Taliban taking over as they did in 1996, possibly in Afghanistan, or for that matter, Afghanistan being a sanctuary for terrorism, not only because of Al Qaeda but because of Isis and, well, the Taliban itself. Look, all those concerns are warranted. I wish I could argue differently, but I can't. What's particularly ironic in Iraq is not only is this You know, we have some history to go by, as you suggest that weakens the ability to fight terrorism. What the administration is concerned about Iranian influence. This seems to me a page the way for increased Iranian influence in Iraq, so even by their own lights. This makes this makes no sense and Afghanistan is really bad. You know. They signed an agreement in February with the Taliban, They bypassed the government. Which in and of itself was bad. It's not a peace agreement that would claims to be. It really is an American withdrawal agreement. The Taliban did not have to give up their arms to not have to agree to. Ah, Ceasefire and they made rhetorical pledges about their relationship with terrorists. But you can't take any of those toe to the bank. Ah, this is really after all we've done in Afghanistan, including the stakes were, you know, I'm prepared to argue that the United States overreach there and trying to remake aspects of the country. But this is this is the opposite mistake. This is under reaching and I hate for that, but that the idea come that down the road, some future administration BIA, Joe Biden's or someone after him. They have to contemplate doing things in places like Iraq or Somalia or Afghanistan simply because the Trump Administration race to the exits and we should mention since you brought up Somalia that the timing on this is really terrible, because There's actually a parliamentary elections that you're coming up soon in about a month, and there's a concern that counterterrorism there of Shabaab led counterterrorism could He stalled working against you, Bob, but this was why getting back to Afghanistan from over. This is why Marcus for the secretary defense was fired. He was concerned about the effects of a rapid pullout on the troops and the remaining What That would mean in terms of our alliance is, but also there's ongoing peace negotiations between the Taliban and the Afghan government that are pretty crucial here, too. Are there There's negotiations going on. I'm skeptical about them. But even if you were a believer in these negotiations Can't think of a worse way to negotiate then to unilaterally make these kinds of reductions. I mean, Mr Trump is renowned for quote unquote. The art of the deal. Well, you'll get a deal here, but you won't get a deal That's worth the paper. It's written on. It won't last the Taliban will have no incentive. T meet its commitments and at this risk the moralizing and undermining the government. What we ought to be doing overtime is potentially reducing our presence. We ought to do it in a coordinated, coordinated way with the government with our NATO allies were also there on the ground. There ought to be done in conjunction with significant long term commitments of military aid, economic support intelligence sport. Essentially, it ought to be coordinated and it ought to be carried out on Lee in a context. In which stability and our interest could be protected. This is a textbook case of how not to go about it. And I'm struck also Richard by the fact that there have been attacks despite this agreement that was signed in February, this diplomatic agreement. On personnel. The coalition personnel even though it was signed, and there have also been let's go to Iraq for a moment rockets fired into the Green Zone in Baghdad near the US Embassy shortly after that withdrawal was announced, so A lot of this is pretty ominous in many ways, and certainly ought to be a great concern. I want also, look at this with you for a moment. From the political standpoint, you have a lot of President Trump's fellow Republicans who were balking at this, including Mitch McConnell. That to me is the only bright side of this. Is that it shows that there is a degree of bipartisan support for first serious foreign policy, which includes, Ah continued American presence in the world, one dimension of which is his military. So the fact that these Republicans on the hill are willing to stand up to President Trump, at least in this domain is welcome and also bodes well for the Biden foreign policy for the Biden administration. I'm not naive. I know how difficult it will be in many areas to forge a common policy path but a matters towards China on matters towards Russia on some aspects of American deployments abroad. This suggests to me that the Biden administration and are even if the Republicans keep the Senate after the Georgia votes. Suggests to me that at least in some areas, bipartisanship in foreign policy is is a real possibility nicely
the NewsWorthy
Pentagon to cut troop levels to 2,500 in Afghanistan, Iraq
"Trump the pentagon to bring a couple of thousand more american troops home from afghanistan and iraq and now the pentagon announced it's happening by january fifteen there are currently about forty five hundred troops in afghanistan and three thousand in iraq. This new directive will bring troop levels down to twenty five hundred in each country. The white house national security advisor said the decision fulfilled trump's campaign promise to bring an end to what he called america's endless wars and a top senior defense official told reporters the twenty. Five hundred troops can accomplish. They've been doing with thousands more but not. Everyone is on board with the decision reuters reports some senior lawmakers from both parties worry it could undermine security in the middle east and hurt fragile peace talks with the taliban they say if troops left now before the taliban agrees to america's and lowers violence the us would have nothing left to negotiate in fact former defense secretary mark esper- who was just fired last week was against bringing more troops home unless conditions in afghanistan improved. I but other say it's okay as long as the draw down is responsibly and carefully executed. Reuters reports the exact detailed plans have not yet been finalized.
AP News Radio
Military wary that shakeup could upend its apolitical nature
"America's top military officer is sending an unmistakable message amid turmoil at the Pentagon where president trump this week fire defense secretary mark esper and installed three loyalists to top jobs joint chiefs chairman mark Emily says the U. S. military is unique we do not take an oath to an individual but rather to the constitution the moral north star for all of us in uniform the president's Pentagon shake up has raised fears about what may come next and in the most extreme scenario whether he may try to win list military help to stay in power Millie said yesterday the military exists not to be a political pawn but to serve the constitution and democracy itself protect and defend that document regardless of personal price soccer make ani Washington
Afternoon News with Tom Glasgow and Elisa Jaffe
Trump fires Secretary of Defense Mark Esper
"President from Fire Defense Secretary Mark Esper yesterday. Now, Washington Democratic Congressman Adam Smith tells MSNBC. He objects this is incredibly destructive act by the president. There's no point in this minutes like 70 days left in the Trump Administration. Smith is the chair of the House Armed Services Committee. There are reports, Trump and Esper disagreed frequently and that led to the move.
Heartland Newsfeed Radio Network
Trump says Defense Secretary Mark Esper has been 'terminated'
"President trump announced on twitter monday. He fired secretary of defense. Mark asper and christopher miller who serves as director of national counterterrorism center will become the acting secretary effective immediately. See notes that the president jettison esper- just two days. After his democratic opponent joe biden was projected as the winner of the presidential election. A conclusion trump has refused to accept
Joel Riley
Trump says Defense Secretary Mark Esper has been 'terminated'
"Has fired a senior member of his Cabinet. President Trump announced on Twitter that he fired his defense secretary, writing quote Mark Esper has been terminated. I would like to thank him for his service, the president says. Christopher Miller, the director of the National Counter Terrorism Center, will now service acting defense secretary Back in June. Esper disagreed with the president on the issue of calling up active duty U. S troops. To deploy two American cities to quell unrest. The president wanted to do that, Esper said. That should only happen as a last resort in the most urgent and dire of situations. Karen Travers, ABC NEWS Washington
BBC World Service
Trump says Defense Secretary Mark Esper has been 'terminated'
"He's fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper. He made the announcement in a tweet. Esper was Trump's second defence secretary, succeeding Jim Mattis, who resigned in 2018. President says Christopher Miller, who is the director of the National Counter Terrorism Center, will serve as acting secretary of defense. The Trump
Pat Walsh
Trump says Defense Secretary Mark Esper has been 'terminated'
"The Defense secretary president Trump tweeted that Esper has been terminated. Effective immediately. Thank him for his service. Christopher Miller will now be the acting defense secretary. And it's
AP News Radio
Trump fires Esper as Pentagon chief after election defeat
"As he struggles to accept election defeat president trump has fired the Pentagon's chief it's a move both widely expected and unprecedented mark esper had been on the outs with the president since the summer amid sharp differences over using the military to quell protests but losing presidents have Intel now kept their defense secretaries in place until the inauguration to preserve stability the president announced espers firing on Twitter saying national counterterror chief Chris Miller will serve as acting secretary removing esper now could unsettle allies and inject more uncertainty to a rocky transition period to Joe Biden Sager mag ani Washington
Anna Davlantes
Trump says Defense Secretary Mark Esper has been 'terminated'
"Trump is firing Defense Secretary Mark Esper. He tweeted that Jesper has been terminated, effective immediately, and he thanked him for his service, he says Christopher Miller will be the acting defense secretary. He's been director of the National Counter Terrorism Center.
Larry O'Connor
Trump says Defense Secretary Mark Esper has been 'terminated'
"The president taking to Twitter this afternoon to say Mark Casper has been terminated. A secretary of Defense Mark Casper's tenure as America's 27th secretary of defence came to an end after the president lost confidence in the top civilian at the Pentagon. Esper was Elevated from acting defense secretary and confirmed by the Senate by a vote of 92 8, Previously the West Point graduate, served as secretary of the Army prior to his service in the Trump administration. As for served as a Senate staffer chief of staff at the Heritage Foundation and is a government lobbyist for Raytheon.