would indeed use nuclear weapons against the west in response to any act of aggression that is committed against russia and its allies. what would that look like? would include helping to shoot down a russian transport plane carrying hundreds of russian troops? the pentagon has admitted doing that. you don t have to be for russia to see that as a pretty reckless act and not just doing it but then bragging about it to nbc news. where does that get us? we should find out. we do know that putin has placed russia s nuclear forces on high alert, and again, russia has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, and again, why wouldn t he use those weapons? they tell us daily he is evil and insane and he may well be. a risk? yeah. but no one in washington seems worried in the slightest. in fact, congressman adam kinzinger, with clearly something to look for at this point, is not going to a blank check i m an open-ended conflict in ukraine using the same legal justification that got us into ir
power with no clear end game. seen that movie before? we just finished one after 20 years in afghanistan. will it look like that? this is an open-ended conflict, said nancy pelosi, just like the war on terror, and just in case you missed it, they all repeated that line. here s her nightmare again, adam schiff in charge of the war against russia. watch. the whole freedom loving world has an interest in the outcome of this war and ensuring that ukraine is victorious, and we are determined to do everything in our power to make it so. we are proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with ukraine, and we will. tucker: these people are playing dress-up. they have no idea what they re talking about, and they don t care. they get to pretend to be statesman for a day. but when adam schiff and nancy pelosi again, people with a demonstrated, years long record of being willing to say anything for personal power,
ukraine, and for ukraine people, i m offended that russia invaded, but i mean, we are getting right up to the brink of something horrible here. why is nobody saying anything about it? well, i think that you ve outlined many of the motivations. i think one of the things that some of my colleagues who have wide eyes on this are also worried about is the fact that we are sending not only billions of dollars, but it s weaponry that, once it gets into ukraine, we are not controlling. so it includes something called the stinger missiles, and does of course contact on commercial airliners, so we are bringing those into poland, we are turning them over to the ukrainians, and then they disappear. so we are pushing up against this conflict not just with russia for all the reasons that you just outlined, but we are also potentially introducing things in the black market, things that could get into the wrong hands, and now we have a disaster. so i think that what you are really facing at this po
future looked grim for adam kinzinger. now adam kinzinger is on the sunday shows every week and doing his winston churchill limitation. you can see the built-in incentive for mediocre and intellectually limited numbers of congress to play the war hawk. but you have to ask yourself, why all of a sudden is everybody talking about chemical and biological weapons? just a couple weeks ago joe biden, the president of united states, promised to respond in-kind to potential use of chemical weapons by russia. in other words, the united states would use its chemical weapons against the russians if they used there is against ukraine, and then, because you are not supposed to admit that you have chemical weapons, the national security advisor for joe biden, whose memory still works, walked back and said the president misspoke just like he did when he told us this was a regime change war. we would never use chemical weapons. but for some reason, a lot of people in washington in both parties are s
tucker: so we arm ukraine so we can fight russia. how many americans, whatever you think of putin probably not much, justifiably probably don t have a lot of interest in moving to russia, but how many americans then or now want to fight russia ? a very small group. but adam schiff said it out loud at the time in the house of a percentage. we don t arm ukraine so we can help ukrainians, they are merely unfortunate ponds and all of this. we arm ukraine so that we can punish russia. why? for stealing hillary clinton s coronation. if only we had taken adam schiff seriously as he said it again and again and again, but now we can t help but take adam schiff seriously because he s one of the prime movers of this war. adam schiff spent this weekend in eastern europe checking on the progress of the war he has done so much to bring about. he traveled there with nancy pelosi and a number of other of the most conspiracy-minded democrats in congress. these are the russiagate true