criminal statements. recently, he talked about it being dangerous that he might wind up incarcerated. could that be used against him in these cases? or is it simply a distraction for pers? i suspect it s really a distraction for prosecutors and to try and come up with some sort of popular support for his position, but i do think that, generally, prosecutors will ignore sort of bellicose worst statements from potential defendants and go about trying the cases that they have. i m also curious to get from both of you, starting with you, tim, mark meadows, he has not said much publicly recently. we know from some reporting there s concern from team trump that he may have flipped. what do you think? hard to say, boris. we included mark meadows in that criminal referral. there was evidence that he was
as far as i know, yes. i don t want to get afternoon head of an investigation. on the f-16s and. if-35s to the middle east, which is the final straw on pushing the pentagon to take this move? i refer you to the dod. why was that decision made? there s been a lead up since may. you re talking about the additional assets. yes. first of all, i point you to the pentagon to talk more specificity. we have seen in resent weeks an increased level of activity in the maritime environment of iranian attacks on maritime shipping. they have become more bellicose, more active. more dangerous to peaceful maritime shipping in the gulf region. the secretary of defense wants to make sure that we have the proper capabilities and assets in place to deal with that. on tunisia this weekend
harassment of shipping vessels. i asked john kirby why the administration is taking this action. here s what he told me. they have become more bellicose, more active and more dangerous the peaceful maritime shipping in the gulf region. the secretary of defense wants to make sure as he should to make sure we have the proper assets in place to do that. the administration will make a series of moves in response to iran s actions. this is the first we ve seen play out since. it s not clear where the fighter jets will be placed or how long they ll stay in that region. the pentagon is pulling the ball in their court. we call upon iran to immediately cease these destabilizing actions that threaten the free throw of commerce through this waterway. since 2019, attacks in the strategic waters have ramped up
what this says about other members of the wagner group. they re in the process now wondering which side to go with. we re told by vladimir putin on saturday that they ll be granted amnesty and protection if they leave the country. his language yesterday was a lot more bellicose than that referring to those that orchestrated this. so what is to stop them from wondering, we don t trust putin and we re not about to lay down our arms? well, again, they don t have much of a choice if they stay where they were. the reports that they have been turning in heavy weaponry to the russian ministry of defense. that aspect is gone. what is able to go over to belarus and stay with wagner, uncertain. we don t have the upshot of what the relationship will be. but they do know if they sign on with the russian ministry of defense, they re going to have
action. i mean, to talk a little bit historically for a second, the chinese believe in in this 19th century idea of a sphere of influence world. they can control anything where they are and the u.s. shouldn t mess with that. it s a little bit like when we declared the monroe doctrine. we don t believe in that. we belief in the rite of navigation. the chinese are trying to undermine that. and since xi jingping became premier and since he was elected to a third term, they ve been much more bellicose, they want to rival the u.s. and that s a dangerous situation because as was mentioned, they re not talking about anything. one of the things that secretary of defense austin said was, look, we need to have some basis where we can talk to each other to avert these kinds of crises