0 that whole time we have left this evening. thank you for making the show possible. thrthank for joining us . please set your dvr. never miss an episode.gr i don'tea think it's complicate. ragan. he helped the mujahadeen. he helped the freedom fighters and the contras well without putting a single boott on the ground. joe follow reagan follow trump and will do fine. >> laura ingram's next . have a great night. i'm laura ingraham. and this is ingrid betancourt from a very busy washington tonight . raymond arroyo is here with the full breakdown of the contrasting styles today between presidents biden and zelenskyy. plus, there are new reports of bombings at this hour in ukraine. we're going to have a live update from our own greg palkot in just a bit. but first, roadblocks to peace. that's the focus of tonight's @ngel nearly three weeks into this war of choice by vladimir putin, we see the horrors of his brutality even against civilians. we also know that with america run by a hologram president with a hobbled economy, chaos reigns and our enemies are emboldened. the world is changing rapidly. and what happens next ? it's not easy to predict. still, there are signs that a peace deal may be within reach. look at what's being discussed because the moment the russians seem ready to accept ukraine as neutral, not nato, but on the model of sweden or austria potentially in the european union and letting outside powers certainly i think include the united states provide guarantees of ukraine's security. so if you listen to what they're actually talking about with the ukrainian counterpart and ignore some of the more steamy rhetoric, the russian position is shifting and zelenskyy shifting as well by being realistic on nato membership. >> we have heard for many years about the open doors, but we also that we can't enter those doors and this is truth and we have simply to accept it as it is. >> now there's clearly a deal here for the making it to any of you feel watching tv or reading online any urgency for peace actual peace. now, of course putin could just decide to stop the shelling right now, but he's not going to do that unless he gets something for and president and one called vladimir putin could end these hostilities. hey, vlad, no more . we purchases no more oil buys to until you stop the killing. but she's not going to do that now. right now he has western europe and america all tied up in knots, blowing billions of dollars trying to help ukraine after the fact, then leaving more discounted russian oil for china and the west is acting as an impediment to peace while we're at this conversation. well, people who don't seem particularly bothered by the prospect of the war dragging on well, mostly for political reasons. that's what we're talking about. well, the principal parties are clearly trying to get to yes, we've already discovered that . but the biden administration never seems to sound hopeful. we have not seen any concrete indication from president putin that he is serious about diplomacy, that he is serious about putting an end to the violence and much to the contrary. and today biden didn't talk offramp talk a lot about peace, but it was all about punishment . together with our allies and partners, we will keep up of pressure on putin's crumbling economy, isolating him on the global stage. that's our goal. make putin pay the price. >> well, that's a nice applause line. as we know, sanctions rarely work and then there's michael mcfaul, the former u.s. ambassador to russia under obama. now he's thinks zelenskyy not around elected officials should dictate our ukraine policy. >> what about listening to him rather than we pretend that we know what he means? what about if he thinks he needs these weapons while we listen to him and when we say, oh , they'll be shut down? oh , he doesn't have airports to put those migs in . what about listening to his judgment to help him fight the war that he is, after all, is the one fighting the war at his country. so of course it's his job to fight for it. what is he talking about? plus, as mcfaul aware that congress hasn't voted on an actual declaration of war or the fact that there's scant public support for us to get into a shooting war with russia. does that matter at all to him now? maybe mcfaul has biden naidus actually think zelenskyy is our secretary of state or our vice president. and let's not forget what senate majority leader chuck schumer has said when he urged peace. well, he didn't urge that's a trick question. >> he's too busy playing the fanboy role in one since his speech was reminiscent of disturbing feeling all of us had in the aftermath of 9/11 . equal parts resolve and unity and determination to save democracy from an hour of darkness. now invoking 9/11 here is simply obscene. he sounds like he's ripping zelenskyy not his constituents . those words, by the way, don't calm things down. they wrap things up. do we want putin to really believe that all on 9/11 we're digging in for the long deployment of us forces and just as reckless is trump hating soon to be former congressman adam kinzinger? and i personally think we need to do a no fly zone. i think we've gotten to the point though where there is significant risk in action now when zelenskyy calls for a no fly zone, it's totally understandable. i don't blame them one bit when kinzinger does it. it's highly irresponsible rather and doing what's in our national interests, which is avoiding a war with russia. he just stoked further tensions and he didn't think i'd forget mitt romney. did you enough talk. people are dying, said the planes that they need. they want migs get them the migs. why don't you pay for them now? did he ever stop to think that more people could die if we send ukraine migs and i'm not talking about russians and last but not least, lindsey graham, do you still stand by your call to be assassinated? do you still stand by your i hope you'll be taken out one way or the other. i don't care either take him out. i don't care if we send him to the hague and try him. >> i just want him to go. yes. if john mccain were here and he'd be saying the same thing well, we all want putin gone, no doubt about it. and regarding john mccain, god rest his soul. but mccain's also the guy who saved obamacare or wanted us mired in syria and never wanted us out of afghanistan. graham's comments don't ratchet down tension again. they stoke tension. the last thing we need is putin even more paranoid than he already is if he thinks he'll die or rot in prison. putin may just say forget negotiations, let it rip. so pooh poohing negotiations threatening putin. that's the easy stuff and it's satisfying at the moment. i get it, but it doesn't accomplish much. no one should be cynically thinking that an extended conflict in ukraine is good for him or her politically either. i hope they're not thinking that because history shows that the longer a war lasts, the more costly it is, by the way, to all involved, us policymakers have to be very careful to make sure we do not end up in a worse position when this is all over and prolonging this by dismissing any chance of peace or downplaying it will only ensure that more innocent people are slaughtered. a lot of the same people who are promising sure victory in ukraine of the linsky just get those migs or surface to air missiles were the same ones promising the same in iraq and afghanistan and we know how that all worked out for us . >> we all know that both putin and president xi are ruthless and determined. they must be resisted in a manner and in a time that will be effective and meaningful. reagan won the cold war by rebuilding our economy and growing our military, which took a few years after the devastation we faced under carter. the same pattern will have to play out here now as the angliss said from the beginning, the situation in ukraine is a horrific tragedy. it breaks all of our hearts, but we have to be prudent and we have to be thoughtful in our response. and right now the u.s. is simply in no good position to engage in another protracted military struggle. we need time to repair our economy, reform our military and get political leadership that actually works, is good, is smart. whatever happens, we cannot repeat the same mistakes we made after 9/11 and that's the angle. joining me now is william rugare, president of the american institute for economic research. william, why does it seem like there is such a wide array of political forces opposed to or at least not helpful in the pursuit of ending this war as soon as possible? >> well, thank you for having me, laura . i think one of the big problems here is that there are parts of the foreign policy elite are ideologically driven towards this position. they're not prudential. they're not realists like i just heard you talk about. right. they don't understand the world as it is as opposed to this kind of idealistic world they would like to be. and that leads them to want to in some ways have an unintended consequence of actually harming the people they would like to help. and i think it's largely because of this ideological project that we've seen this over the last 20 to 30 years. actually it's of peace even though this is a different front, it's similar to what we saw in afghanistan, the people that opposed the withdrawal and still think it was a bad idea for america to end its longest war . so i think that's one of the big problem is that we're talking about realism which you expressed, which i expressed, which so many more americans believe in and that kind of ideological nature of the foreign policy establishment in washington. >> now that poll that came out ,a yougov poll that came out a couple of days ago when people just ask know do you think we should help with a no fly zone, it's pretty has a lot of support among the american people. when you say a no fly zone where american military aircraft could engage with russian aircraft and expand this military conflict, it just the numbers completely flip and overwhelmingly against involvement in a no fly zone with that context, i mean, they had to admit that in the poll that really tells the story, does it not? and the people were saying the same thing from about twenty six or so on regarding iraq and then ultimately in afghanistan they wanted our troops home. >> yeah, i think what americans appreciate the cost that could occur and we saw that again in afghanistan where they understood that if we continue to stay there it was going to be more american suffering, more americans coming home at dover and more dollars out the door. but i think when americans appreciate the cost, they know this is not a good deal for americans because again, this is just not in our national interest. we don't want to get into a war with russia, a nuclear armed russia over ukraine, which again we can feel terrible for the people of ukraine and the tragedy of this aggression by putin. but it isn't our fight and we need to avoid an escalation into that . and you know what's funny is that even academics realized this no fly zone is a bad idea. right. william and mary did a study. it just came out today that showed that only seven percent of international relations scholars believe that a no fly zone is a good idea. i mean, again, there's just a kind of anti realism involved in these people who say, yeah, let's risk it all. i mean, that's just got us down this terrible road all along right back to 2003 in iraq, afghanistan, somalia, you know, libya, an underrated bad war . so again, we shouldn't listen to these same old, same old. we need a new guard. fortunately, i think there are more people, not just the base of americans but others in washington that are kind of bubbling up and this voice well, the state department more often not is is is really dismissive of the idea that vladimir putin as horrible and evil as he is, would ever pursue any real negotiations that end up in ending this madness. what our concern has been a strong possibility that what the russians are engaging in is something akin to the pretense of diplomacy. in other words, going through the motions we need to see happen less words and more action on the ground when the state department just doesn't seem to be interested in getting involved here and certainly not ushering us toward a peaceful resolution after the slaughter that's taken place. we don't want a situation where for these ideological reasons we're willing to see the ukrainians fight to the very last person. you know, there's there's an unintended consequence here of people dying and suffering on the grounds. this is going to end up in a negotiated settlement and that's a settlement that unfortunately we should have had before this crisis turned into a war. i mean, this issue of the enlargement of nato of the military to military exercises that the west has had with places like ukraine, georgia to increase military interoperability, these are things that russia has signaled were real problems. but again, that doesn't justify the aggression. but it does show you that we've been pushing, pushing, pushing and there's been a push back . and i think that we really need to think about ways to peace, ways to stability, especially because our interest is mainly in avoiding an escalatory spiral into a war, particularly a nuclear conflict. and we need to find ways to cooperate on those issues with russia because that's what diplomacy does when it works with not just friends but adversaries to find a path towards our national interests. >> well, backing people into a corner is always a very risky move. william, thank you . good to see you tonight . and given all the media manipulation around all issues, including war , we have to ask who is it supposed to benefit? well, today the new york times gave us an answer. ukraine war shifts the agenda in congress empowering a center with a crisis rocking europe. the left shelving demands for defense cuts and a swift end to fossil fuels while on the right trump era foreign policy and criticism of ukraine are fading. translation the establishment's back in control and no dissent will be tolerated. here now is john daniel davidson, political editor of the federalist. john, the establishment wants to declare that america first foreign policy a more nationalist patria foreign policy is over . we've turned a page from that and the media wins to in this game. yeah, it's a rare bipartisan moment in washington. you know, there's nothing that republicans and democrats in the center so-called can agree on than getting america involved in a war overseas. and so we're kind of seeing this return to form in washington. you mentioned that new york times headline. you're also seeing it in places like the wall street journal where, you know, you open up to the opinion page and there's all sorts columns and editorials calling for humanitarian airlifts and limited no fly zones and you know, the provision of these really advanced weapons systems to ukraine. and nowhere is anyone talking or even being honest about the fact that we run very serious risk of escalation with these actions. it's like they're just hand waving these things away and we're not even having a debate about it like you can see it changing day to day in washington and well, and who's going to get the weapons that we end up funding or sending that make their way to ukraine who ultimately will have possession of those weapons? we've seen that play out time and again as well. and by the way, no one is more representative, i think of the establishment than the morning joe gang. you have nancy pelosi, you have mitt romney people on the right and the left coming together to support a man who's the spiritual leader of democracy in the west and around the world right now we see very clearly between right and wrong. america is strongest when america stands together and the president of the united states has performed remarkably well john. there's celebrating the political establishment, the bipartisan political establishment coming together to do something the american people, when you give them the actual context and the facts do not want. >> well, yeah, that's what the establishment does best is doing things the american people do not want to do. and that's true of international wars overseas. it's true of international trade and global trade deals. it's true of the southern border. it's true of so many things. there is there is the establishment, the permanent washington bipartisan establishment that does what is its own best interests and it doesn't really take much account of what the american people want. and so we had this brief window during the trump presidency where you started to see what a more populist agenda in foreign policy in trade breaking through the crust of the establishment washington and he fought back very hard and now we're seeing a return to form. there's a sense, i think in washington that everyone is relieved that there's this war to talk about and ways to talk about how to escalate it because now we don't have to talk about the things that most americans are really concerned about inflation, the price of gas, the southern border, the problems that we have in our schools, the problems that we have in our cities with, with homelessness and with drug addiction. well, because then, john, you have to hold them accountable then then the politicians who allowed all of this to happen, including destroying our industrial base in the midwest, sending all of our jobs overseas, they don't want to talk about that much rather talk about another country's devastation without talking about the fentanyl or everything else that's devastating the american population. they don't want to talk about that . i think you hit it right on the head. it's a it's a way to avoid a conversation about america. they always prefer that is why we love the federal. john, thank you . and breaking right now, keith, every five hour curfew is going to be coming to an end just about 90 minutes or so. fox the senior foreign affairs correspondent greg palkot is to the west of the capital and livy's greg, you're hearing those air raid sirens now i understand you can hear them exact. exactly. you can probably hear behind us quite an eerie scene here hearing that empty streets when the sirens go off doesn't necessarily mean they're russians are attacking the city itself. it could be anywhere in the region. and in fact, just a couple of hours ago we got reports of a cross border attack from belarus to ukraine in a town just to the to the north of where we are right now who was shelled. but a lot of action in kyiv on wednesday, just about a mile and a half from president zelenskyy residence, a building was shelled and other 12 storey building was destroyed. the bulk of the russian forces remain outside, but they're basically pounding the center and pounding the suburbs. the port city of mariupol, big theater was was hit there that was being used as a as a shelter for civilians, including children. we don't have the word on casualties there yet. a hospital is commandeered by russians for a shooting position and aid convoys were blocked again from going in and in the city of cherney. ten people killed there waiting on a bread line when a bomb dropped on them. this caused the president zelenskyy to refer to that when he was speaking to congress. and he also said in his simple words, we need you now to the united states. president biden coming up with the other eight hundred billion dollars worth of military aid. finally, laura , the word on the negotiation between ukraine and russia. they describe it as serious and realistic, but the horror going on around this country is very unrealistic. back greg, do we have any report tonight about our own benjamin hall and his condition ? some good news in a very sad week for